pigeonhole ereject vs reject

[Robert Blayzor]

On Jan 13, 2015, at 8:44 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote:
>> 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


RFC5429 clarifies the need and why "ereject" should be used vs. reject with NDR.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5429


Maybe in your MTA at data time you just accept the message and bounce later (or just discard it).  I have the flexibility and the choice not to.

--
Robert
inoc.net!rblayzor
http://inoc.net/