* Barry Warsaw <ba...@list.org>: > On Jul 12, 2011, at 01:06 PM, Ian Eiloart wrote: > > >Bouncing certainly is suboptimal, since it may create collateral spam. Better > >to reject the message at SMTP time with a 5xx response than to bounce. > > That's an interesting take on it. The LMTP server in Mailman could reject > messages addressed to disabled lists, and that 5xx error should propagate > through the MTA.
Is disabling a list a temporary measure? If it is, should the server reply a
temporary error?
421 <domain> Service not available, closing transmission channel
(This may be a reply to any command if the service knows it
must shut down)
450 Requested mail action not taken: mailbox unavailable
(e.g., mailbox busy)
Or is it permanent?
550 Requested action not taken: mailbox unavailable
(e.g., mailbox not found, no access, or command rejected
for policy reasons)
p@rick
--
state of mind ()
Digitale Kommunikation
http://www.state-of-mind.de
Franziskanerstraße 15 Telefon +49 89 3090 4664
81669 München Telefax +49 89 3090 4666
Amtsgericht München Partnerschaftsregister PR 563
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
