I wrote:
> > However if you take precautions not to expose most of the email
> > addresses of your network on the Web or Usenet or in unprotected mailing
> > list archives (i.e. those places where spammers go to harvest e-mail
> > adresses) and you make sure that the addresses which you need to expose
> > will never become invalid, you will not have this problem.
Philip Hazel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> replied
> I am sorry, but that is totally unrealistic.
>
> We are a University of over 20,000 people. There is no way we can stop
> our users exposing their email addresses to the world. Several thousand
I'm sorry that the words I used may indeed be read as sounding a little
arrogant, or even insulting. I assure you that they were not meant like
that!
In fact I did not intend to claim that this scenario would be realistic
for everyone or for you in particular. However there are situations (in
more corporate environments) where it is possible to do this.
The point which I wanted to make is that since in some situations it is
possible to control the effects of spam (so that spam does not cause you
to be flooded with masses of pointless double bounces) it makes sense to
include a statement in the RFC which will prevent software packages from
causing pointless double bounces.
-- NB
