dovecot - Apr 2020 - sieve question

On Apr 20, 2020, at 19:13, @lbutlr <kremels at kreme.com>
wrote:
> 
> The other thing you can do is NOMX the old domain.
Sorry, nullmx is what I meant. 

Btw, I think this is the best solution.

Sent from my iPhone

Hi all,

Thanks for the interesting discussion.

The idea behind the catch-all mailbox is basically to have a 
transitional period between now and the nullmx config we did not know 
about. (thanks for mentioning that, we will do it!)

Our autoreply message reads: "Your email has not been read nor 
forwarded", which is also the case, forcing the sender to take action.
It is just kept in a simple catch-all mailbox, for a couple of 
weeks/months, in case we discover that something important was 
accidentally still sent to the old domain.

And yes, that would be neither fish nor flesh for the time being, but 
only during the transitional period. Afterwards we will put the nullmx 
config in place.

Thanks for again for all your thoughts: appreciated.

MJ

On 4/21/20 4:02 AM, LuKreme wrote:
> On Apr 20, 2020, at 19:13, @lbutlr <kremels at kreme.com> wrote:
>>
>> The other thing you can do is NOMX the old domain.
> 
> Sorry, nullmx is what I meant.
> 
> Btw, I think this is the best solution.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
>

* mj:
> Our autoreply message reads: "Your email has not been read nor
> forwarded", which is also the case, forcing the sender to take action.
No, it does not. An auto-reply message, even if it is actually read by
the sender, can be ignored without penalty. An MTA rejection puts the
ball into the sender's court because the message has never been accepted
by the recipient's MX. By the way, a rejection is "legally safe",
while
your catch-all-and-let-messages-rot approach is not, in case you have
not considered that.

Of course, you can do as you please, but that does not change the facts
and mechanics involved.

-Ralph