On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 02:52:58PM -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > >our servers. If people choose to view that as us being the source of > >SPAM, then they are negating the entire point of having backup MX's for > >when stuff hits the fan. > > Is 'your' queue better than everyone else's?
Yes. My queue might know when the customer/mailserver gets back online. > Why not do a 4xx tmpfail > if your address check temporarily fails? Any real MTA should be > prepared to queue and retry. Because not every legitimate MTA retries, or retries often enough. By the way, if you hate bounce spam, you could always deploy BATV (http://mipassoc.org/batv/) locally, and reject fake bounces. -- Jan-Pieter Cornet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> !! Disclamer: The addressee of this email is not the intended recipient. !! !! This is only a test of the echelon and data retention systems. Please !! !! archive this message indefinitely to allow verification of the logs. !! _______________________________________________ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it. Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
