On 28 Jan 2012, at 9:45, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 28.01.2012 07:00, schrieb Bill Cole:
to say it not polite: it is idiotic to remove "User unknown"
That's debatable. However, it is explicitly allowed by RFC5321 and
its ancestors.
not all things which are allowed are smart
the RFC allows you
Am 28.01.2012 15:45, schrieb Reindl Harald:
>> In short: in reply to RCPT, '550' should be treated as "User Unknown" unless
>> it is followed by a standard enhanced status code other than '5.1.1'
>> (which should be considered as an unequivocal and authoritative statement
>> that the addressed mai
Am 28.01.2012 07:00, schrieb Bill Cole:
>> to say it not polite: it is idiotic to remove "User unknown"
>
> That's debatable. However, it is explicitly allowed by RFC5321 and its
> ancestors.
not all things which are allowed are smart
the RFC allows you even a open-relay
so should we help anyb
On 27 Jan 2012, at 14:17, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 27.01.2012 20:08, schrieb Mailing Lists:
I was curious, is it possible to create custom error messages? For
example when I get a bounce back error:
- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
b...@test.com <mailt
Thanks for the suggestion sir, you have a good point on the black listing,
didn't think of that perspective.
On Jan 27, 2012, at 2:17 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 27.01.2012 20:08, schrieb Mailing Lists:
>> I was curious, is it possible to create custom error me
Am 27.01.2012 20:08, schrieb Mailing Lists:
> I was curious, is it possible to create custom error messages? For example
> when I get a bounce back error:
>
>- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
> b...@test.com <mailto:b...@test.com>
>
I was curious, is it possible to create custom error messages? For example
when I get a bounce back error:
- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors -
b...@test.com
(reason: 550 5.1.1 : Recipient address rejected: User
unknown in virtual mailbox table)
(expanded
