>>>>> "DN" == Dale Newfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DN> Your scheme makes sense--I like the idea that subscribers can
DN> wind up "on probation" (assuming the list admin configures the
DN> list that way). I understand that this simplifying assumption
DN> makes the design much easier to think through. As a list
DN> admin, though, I'd like to be able to throw a switch that
DN> causes Mailman to completely ignore non-fatal bounces
DN> (Assuming it's possible to distinguish between them, which is
DN> maybe the can of worms you were trying to avoid opening).
I'm not sure it always /is/ possible to distinguish them, especially
if you add VERP into the mix. AFAICT, that's the one flaw with VERP.
With bounce detection at least you have a wild-ass chance of
distinguishing permanent from temporary failures (e.g. DSN).
My simplification assumes that temporary failures really /are/
temporary! I think my approach is robust in the face of probably the
most common temporary failure I see as a list admin: a user running
out of disk space for a period of several days or a week. Once they
get a clue and free up some room, and deliveries start to succeed, I
want them to get off probation. Ideally automatically, but as a
failsafe, by the probation notices.
-Barry
_______________________________________________
Mailman-Developers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers
