I'm a developer, and one thing that I was hoping James could provide was programmatic fast-fail. The reasons listed "for" this feature on the above page seem to miss the most obvious: The ability to return an SMTP error to the sending MTA.
The reason I want this feature is so I can qualify dynamic addresses. I'd like to qualify an address such as <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> against an algorithm or <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> against a dynamic database.
Once the message is accepted, it's impossible to accurately return a bounce message to the sender. Nor can you take advantage of any of the soft or hard bounce processing provided by the sending MTA.
Is this really a James-Dev thread?
This is a great use of James and has nothing to do with fast-fail. When create the bounce message, the bounce has to go to [EMAIL PROTECTED] If it didn't, that would be a bug. You'll see the occasional "I'm on vacation" sent back to the original poster on listservs, and that's because the mail server of the person on vacation is buggy (or often the I'm-on-vacation notice feature).
If the user community came up with some good reasons to add it, it can move to dev to discuss how to do it, but my point was to explain to the user community why what they're trying to do doesn't need or relate to fast-fail, such as the example you've given.
-- Serge Knystautas President Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com p. 301.656.5501 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
