Subject: reject imples stop?

From: Tim Showalter <[email-masked]>
Date: 16 Feb 1999 18:07:27 -0500

Should a reject imply a stop?  If reject is incompatible with all other
actions, this is a very reasonable behavior.

If first-action-encountered wins, what happens when you fileinto, then
reject?

Tim

-- 
Tim Showalter <[email-masked]>

---

From: "J.D. Falk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 17:02:40 -0800

> If first-action-encountered wins, what happens when you fileinto, then

	I think it should just be filed and then rejected.  This is
	something I've seen implemented from time to time for tracking
	purposes -- with the various new anti-spam laws on the books,
	it seems likely that there'll be more need for such things, as
	well as merely fileinto and discard.

-- 
J.D. Falk <[email-masked]>                     Got clue?  http://www.ispf.com/
Special Agent In Charge (Abuse Issues)
Critical Path, Inc.

---

From: Tim Showalter <[email-masked]>
Date: 16 Feb 1999 20:07:40 -0500

> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 17:02:40 -0800
> From: "J.D. Falk" <[email-masked]>
> 

I have moral problems with a specification that says reject and a
fileinto are not incompatible.  While I know implementations will
(sometimes) implement this anyway, as an administrator I do not want to
present the ability to users to make my mail servers lie.

Tim