pigeonhole ereject vs reject

[Reindl Harald]

Am 14.01.2015 um 02:40 schrieb Robert Blayzor:
> On Jan 13, 2015, at 8:30 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote:
>>
>> so what you want in your OP is just DISCARD in a sieve script and there is no point in "Using Dovecot LMTP it would be more optimal to kick a 5xx back" when the desired result is DISCARD
>>
>> why do you want the burden of keep the SMTP session with the client open until the mail is finally stored? that don't scale!
>
> Sieve is all about policy

no - it is about *filter* mails

> A 5xx reject would let the sending server know the message could not be delivered due a failure

which belongs in the MTA and not the LDA

> (ie: user policy rejection, without receiving MTA generating NDR backscatter).
> I would rather not just accept it and the message disappear into ether without
> the sender receiving any notification of why.

hence you reject messages on MTA level before LMTP is called because 
taht happens in case of sender based filters in the envelope-level and 
in case of subject filters at least before the mailbody

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20150114/ae5da9db/attachment.sig>