Paul G. Allen([EMAIL PROTECTED])@Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 11:30:46AM -0700: > > It is because of the autoresponder that some important Greenest > Host (GH) customers insist upon using that I no longer pay any > attention to bounce messages I get in the GH admin account. > <snip>
What are they using? Does it just use stupid defaults? Or is it prone to mis-configuration? I never use autoresponders myself. Generally, if I don't read my e-mail right away, I will still likely read it before it matters to the sender. > Unfortunately, the required qmail MTA is so lame that I can do > nothing about the bounce messages from autoresponders also going > to the admin account as well. <snip> Why does the autoresponder care what MTA is installed? There are several autoresponders that will work with qmail, didn't realize any of them were limited to qmail, though. I really like the way the MDA part of qmail works (specifically dot-qmail files). I use it specifically for that, but put a greylisting proxy in front of it. The sticking spot with qmail for me is that it accepts all e-mails, processes them, then bounces the undeliverables. Its default configuration won't block SMTP connections that misbehave or are obviously abusive in some way. (There are probably patches that will... never used them, though.) So, what is it you'd like to separate out? Since you are stuck with qmail, maybe some of the qmail users on the list can identify a way of making it more workable. As I understand it, you want to be able to distinguish between: 1. Joe-job bounces that aren't from you in the first place. 2. Bounce e-mails that are legitimate and possibly useful. 3. Messages from this broken autoresponder. 4. Something else? Are the autoresponders simply autoresponding? or is the autoresponse causing a bounce? I'm not really clear on that. Wade Curry syntaxman -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
