On Mon, 5 Dec 2005, Douglas Otis wrote: > A less than elegant solution as an alternative to deleting the message, is > to hold the data phase pending the scan.
Contrary to your vision of this option, it is not only elegant; it happens to be the *correct* thing to do. Dropping the message on the floor is arguably stretching the bounds of RFC2821. If a message is going to be dropped because of a policy (such as a worm/virus flag), you really should be rejecting after DATA with a RFC1893 5.7.x extended result code. > Another solution would be not returning message content within a DSN. If you're still sending to a forged address, how is this not still UBE...? -- -- Todd Vierling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
