Thankyou all for the feedback.
I think I see what the problem is now.
Some ISPs simply seem to think that:
- all BOUNCE messages are unsolicited _therefore_ ALL
unsolicited messages are SPAM !
Is this absolutely True!! of course not!
If I misspell a username I
Peter Chubb wrote:
As a general rule bounces are evil. I'm planning to give a talk at
SLUG on this next month, if the committee agree
The major exception to that would be messages submitted down the
Submission (STMP+TLS+AUTH) port. You know they aren't spam or
relayed, so full service
On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 13:29 +1000, R.G.Salisbury wrote:
Some ISP's do bounce a message , so you know the status , so you know it is
futile to try again to the same address.
Knowing the dictionary attacks that spammers do and how often I get
thousands (litterally) of bounced emails that they
On Wed, Aug 13, 2008, R.G.Salisbury wrote:
Do the RFCs suggest a recommended policy?
RFC 2821: Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
It includes the following:
... a formal handoff of responsibility for the message occurs: the
protocol requires that a server accept responsibility for either
delivering
R == R G Salisbury R.G.Salisbury writes:
R Some ISP's (exetel ... [EMAIL PROTECTED]) is one, that do
R not bounce notices when you send to an invalid email address).
R Some ISP's do bounce a message , so you know the status , so you
R know it is futile to try again to the same address.
The
Peter Chubb wrote:
I'm planning to give a talk at
SLUG on this next month, if the committee agree
I'm not on the committee, but if I was, I'd be voting +1 on
this :-).
Cheers,
Erik
--
-
Erik de Castro Lopo
