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
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 bad recipient, etc. Yes, I know bounces and rejects
