lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
>[delivered-to loop detection]
> I was not aware of this one. As far as i can see this is only a
> problem if "local" is used, no?
Wietse:
> > Both local(8) and pipe(8) (one has Delivered-To: enabled by default,
> > the other has this off by default for historical compatibilit
Zitat von Wietse Venema :
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
Zitat von Noel Jones :
>
> - Spoofed Delivered-to:. AFAIK this has never been a major
> problem, and is a useful feature to detect mail loops. If it
> becomes a problem, you can use header_checks to IGNORE
> Delivered-to (will let a loop run unti
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
> Zitat von Noel Jones :
>
> >
> > - Spoofed Delivered-to:. AFAIK this has never been a major
> > problem, and is a useful feature to detect mail loops. If it
> > becomes a problem, you can use header_checks to IGNORE
> > Delivered-to (will let a loop run until too many hops
Zitat von Noel Jones :
- Spoofed Delivered-to:. AFAIK this has never been a major
problem, and is a useful feature to detect mail loops. If it
becomes a problem, you can use header_checks to IGNORE
Delivered-to (will let a loop run until too many hops are in
the Received: headers, or until som
Le 18/07/2011 20:47, Steve Fatula a écrit :
> Having read quite a few of the messages in this list about bounces, I really
> didn't find any (though they may be there) related to preventing bounces for
> resource limits, and other unpredictable and strange occurrences. That is my
> question, NOT
> My opinion is if you correctly reject -- not bounce --
> spam/virus/bad recipient email, that takes care of 95%+ of the
> problem bounces, and is a good practice minimum standard.
Agreed, and I do.
I guess then that I should change the after queue SPAM content filter to use
the
advanced metho
On 7/18/2011 1:47 PM, Steve Fatula wrote:
> Having read quite a few of the messages in this list about bounces, I really
> didn't find any (though they may be there) related to preventing bounces for
> resource limits, and other unpredictable and strange occurrences. That is my
> question, NOT b
