On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 08:35:52PM -0400, Blu wrote: > > I do that. A call forward to the next server in the chain to verify the > recipient before accepting the mail from the sender. I use Exim though. > It even caches the recipient verification results to avoid unnecesary > traffic. I don't know if it is that easy with postfix, but surely it is > doable.
It sounds tempting but in my opinion you don't gain much if the next hop is not the final destination and it does not support this forward call feature. Even if it did it could rule out the mail in question perfectly legitimely based on content analysis performed in the DATA stage. Personally, I throw my bets on simple systems. I think it is the innocen destination host of the bounce message that should protect itself from unwanted bounces, for example by dropping those which refer to message-ids that were not sent by that host. It seems more practical than expecting every other mail systems to protect *you*. bit, adam -- Am I a cleric? | 1024D/37B8D989 Or maybe a sinner? | 954B 998A E5F5 BA2A 3622 Unbeliever? | 82DD 54C2 843D 37B8 D989 Renegade? | http://sks.dnsalias.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
