Re: Value of backup MX

To: debian-isp@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Value of backup MX
From: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 20:37:04 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 20041110193704.GL21711@mails.so.argh.org>
Mail-followup-to: Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>, debian-isp@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] Pine.LNX.4.58.0411101412480.3324@zen.opentrend.net>
References: <[🔎] slrncp1k5n.khi.jgoerzen@christoph.complete.org> <[🔎] 20041109222411.GA4592@taz.net.au> <[🔎] Pine.LNX.4.58.0411101412480.3324@zen.opentrend.net>

* Robert Brockway (rbrockway@opentrend.net) [041110 20:20]:
> Oh you mean reject mail for unknown recipients rather than bounce the
> mail[1].  Ok, I can see why you are suggesting it but it is an RFC
> violation.

Why should it be a RFC violation to reject mail for unknown recipients
with 550? If a remote client sends me a mail adress I don't accept on a
permanent reason, I should give a 5xx error code.


Cheers,
Andi
-- 
   http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
   PGP 1024/89FB5CE5  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Value of backup MX
  - From: Robert Brockway <rbrockway@opentrend.net>

References:
- Value of backup MX
  - From: John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org>
- Re: Value of backup MX
  - From: Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
- Re: Value of backup MX
  - From: Robert Brockway <rbrockway@opentrend.net>

Prev by Date: Re: Value of backup MX
Next by Date: Re: Value of backup MX
Previous by thread: Re: Value of backup MX
Next by thread: Re: Value of backup MX
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread