* * * * * Sendmail Blows, and here's why My my my … it looks like sendmail [1] might be the culprit here, not Exchange. [2] As per RFC-821: [3] > > "User name" is a fuzzy term and used purposely. If a host > implements the VRFY or EXPN commands then at least local mailboxes > must be recognized as "user names". If a host chooses to > recognize other strings as "user names" that is allowed. > > In some hosts the distinction between a mailing list and an alias > for a single mailbox is a bit fuzzy, since a common data structure > may hold both types of entries, and it is possible to have mailing > lists of one mailbox. If a request is made to verify a mailing > list a positive response can be given if on receipt of a message > so addressed it will be delivered to everyone on the list, > otherwise an error should be reported (e.g., "550 That is a > mailing list, not a user"). If a request is made to expand a user > name a positive response can be formed by returning a list > containing one name, or an error can be reported (e.g., "550 That > is a user name, not a mailing list"). > > > RFC-821, § 3.3. VERIFYING AND EXPANDING > > > EXPAND (EXPN) > > This command asks the receiver to confirm that the argument > identifies a mailing list, and if so, to return the > membership of that list. The full name of the users (if > known) and the fully specified mailboxes are returned in a > multiline reply. > > This command has no effect on any of the reverse-path > buffer, the forward-path buffer, or the mail data buffer. > > > RFC-821, § 4.1.1. COMMAND SEMANTICS > From my reading, it seems that sendmail should not be sending back the program name, but rather, it should just return the email address passed in. This is not good … [1] http://www.sendmail.org/ [2] gopher://gopher.conman.org/0Phlog:2000/08/22.3 [3] ftp://nis.nsf.net/document/rfc/rfc0821.txt Email author at sean@conman.org .