Re: Handling mail from mailer daemons

From: Murray S. Kucherawy <msk_at_blackops.org>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2010 22:45:08 -0700 (PDT)

On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>> In fact MTA 2 would have signed the DSN, except that DSNs are not
>> passed through signing filters by MTA 2 by design, so its DSNs will
>> never be signed.
>
> Why? I don't understand the rationale for such design.

DSNs are generated internally; they don't arrive via SMTP, and the SMTP
handling code is where the filter hooks are.

> This is yet another failure point for ADSP. However, they could have
> set up a sub-domain for sending those bounces "From".

I think that requires MTA awareness of ADSP and thus would be a hard sell.

> I'd imagine someone could argue that "all" means all, not
> all-except-bounces-and-possibly-another-bunch-of-unusual-cases. The
> protocol world to describe the latter is "unknown".

This is definitely a setting to accomodate MTA design, not a statement
about how ADSP should've been written in the first place. That said, I'm
wondering if it's a good idea.
Received on Fri Oct 08 2010 - 05:45:31 PST