Re: Last erratum last call (was: Upcoming new test-suite release)

On Sun, 6 Apr 2008, Frank Ellermann wrote:

> > PermError => add note that this is about a syntactically invalid
> >              <target-name> for DNS, for example adjacent dots.

> > you could still change your mind
> 
> Nobody made new noises in this direction, therefore I edited
> the "last erratum" to say "no match".  Please check that the
> proposed text says what you want:

You had me convinced that PermError was better than nomatch.  Mainly
because literally putting a:example..com is a plausible typo that should
get a PermError, rather than silently failing to match.  You made the
case that no legitimate sender should generate a PermError via macros.
(If the policy wants to accomodate braindead senders, don't use %{h}.)

My only reservation is that spammers could generate PermError via macros.
I was considering posting an auto-note to postmaster in case of PermError
in addition to a DSN, but PermError from macros would discourage that.

-- 
	      Stuart D. Gathman <[email protected]>
    Business Management Systems Inc.  Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.