you may have noticed that there's another thread similar to this on the list
right now. i'd first suggest that you ignore the 471 part, as that would be
changing the meaning of the error from permanent to temporary. my second
suggestion would be to find out exactly what the customer thinks the
difference in codes is, and to find out exactly why he needs to know the
difference between 553 and 571.
my last suggestion is to tell the customer to go pound rocks. changing the
behavior of a production system just so a customer can get some strange
package to work right is going way beyond the call of duty. other packages
don't necessary depend on the difference in codes, so it would be one thing
to change the return code in certain situations, but it seems pretty silly
to change it for everything.
shag
=====
Judd Bourgeois | CNM Network +1 (805) 520-7170
Software Architect | 1900 Los Angeles Avenue, 2nd Floor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Simi Valley, CA 93065
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
----- Original Message -----
From: Rich Aldridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tue 12 Oct 1999 6.44
Subject: Mail Return Codes.
> Hello again,
>
> I have a customer who uses a package called mailtraq. He calls our
> outgoing server from an external address sometimes. When using his
> mailtraq package to send mail via our outgoing server, he gets a 553
> status code from the server. He has requested that we return a 471 or
> 571 code instead. I reckon that "toying" with these codes may not be a
> good idea as other packages may depend on them. What does anyone else
> think, and are there any other solutions ?
>
> Thanks and regards,
>
> Rich Aldridge
> Internet Systems Engineer,
> Cable Internet.
>
>
>
