On Mon, Jan 04, 1999 at 12:39:33AM +0000, Paul Gregg wrote:
# In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
#
# > Your points may be valid and correct, but you only echoed what was originally
# > stated anyway. The "To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]" IS part of the body, not the RCPT
# > TO: The [EMAIL PROTECTED] stuff started when someone else said they'd like
# > to bounce that too, but I just answered that.
#
# I echoed what others had said, yes. But I had to pull it all together because
# people were not grasping what was actually going on.
#
# > Since I started this thread I can tell you without question what it's about
# > and [EMAIL PROTECTED] isn't any part of it. I want to reject mail being
# > sent to certain valid usernames, such as my database. I'd also like to bounce
# > some mail to nonvalid usernames without accepting and bouncing afterward since
# > they only double bounce anyway.
#
# To do this, then it requires qmail-smtpd to know everything that qmail-send
# does. It requires a major rethink and rewriting of the qmail system.
# We'll have to see what dbj comes up with for Qmail-II - we know that many of
# us would like to see such a feature.
no, it wouldnt
invalid usernames would be dfined in a file, and would then be not accepted
admin defined user named
# > The problem with accepting and trashing the messages is that if mail is sent
# > to the database (ferinstance) I'd have to filter out what is junk mail and
# > what's valid - like cron results.
#
# If you are in control of the local delivery then you already can control
# who sends mail to your database. Why can't you use procmail?
not every machine has procmail, or wants to run procmail
--
/- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -\
|Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. |
|Simon & Schuster A&AT | Attention span is quickening. |
|Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. |
\-------- http://www.superlibrary.com/people/justin/ ----------/
