I know, we've had this discussion before. In actual fact most mail servers behind SMTP forwarding firewalls will be blackholes for spam as James is. Additionally it has been a goal to eventually achieve some kind of rejection of obvious spam , but this would have to be coherent with the style of James. In other words optional, modular, and either highly configurable or dead simple.
I'm not in the least opposed to handling spam this way and I've seen (rare) instances where spammers mistake a blackhole for a relay, but on the whole spammers test MTAs for relaying before they waste their own bandwidth and clock cycles pouring mail into a blackhole. And don't forget that rejecting mail is a two way street, every recipient address which you reject because of "unknown recipient" helps automated address harvesters build up more accurate lists of real addresses to spam, and spam targeted at real addresses is the real problem. d. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 28 November 2002 23:00 > To: James Users List > Subject: RE: My first contact with James > > > > We would prefer JAMES to refuse mail that did not match its accept > criteria. I have installed mail servers for many companies. I cannot > think of a single one that would be happy with the concept of paying for > the bandwidth that would be used up in receiving mail that it was > not going > to process. (Regardless of actual likelihood of this happening, or real > world numbers, most clients are not keen on the /idea/.) > > However I can see that that might be difficult to do with JAMES. We hide > JAMES behind a firewall for precisely this reason. It is not > really such a > big deal in my current situation, because JAMES is never going to be used > as our corporate mail server. JAMES only receives mail that needs to be > processed by our java code. > > Obviously, this is not the way everyone uses (or should use) JAMES. It is > one way of dealing with the spam issue, however. > > ADK > > -------------------------------------------- > > There is no magic. > > > > > "Danny Angus" > > <danny@apache. To: "Nebril de la > Fuente, Victor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > org> cc: "James User > List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: My > first contact with James > 29/11/2002 > > 07:51 > > Please respond > > to "James > > Users List" > > > > > > > > > > Victor, > > > But James acept the message and then do not process it. A mail > > server shouldn�t accept the message if is a spam. > > Thats your opinion, there are good reasons why James accepts mail. > These reasons have been discussed a lot, if you want to find out I suggest > you check the mail archives. > James is not an open relay for spam. > > d. > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Have you seen our website?.... http://www.vodafone.co.nz CAUTION: This correspondence is confidential and intended for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not the named recipient and receive this correspondence in error, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it and you should delete it from your system and notify the sender immediately. Thank you. Unless otherwise stated, any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not represent those of Vodafone New Zealand Limited. Vodafone New Zealand Limited 21 Pitt Street, Private Bag 92161, Auckland, 1020, New Zealand Telephone + 64 9 357 5100 Facsimile + 64 9 377 0962 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
