The motivation for this is to recognize soft bounces (mailbox full, mail servers down) from hard bounces
Servers should probably not be sending a bounce, or at least a non-RFC 1894 bounce, for a soft error. VERP seems to be somewhat predicated upon bounces being permanent, at least for that message. To work around the fact that the errors may relate to a transient mailbox error, it seems that VERP mailers will be tolerant of a configured number of bounces, and will then send an "warning message" to inform the user. If the warning bounces, the user is disconnected from the list. That seems to describe the behavior I've seen from ezmlm, but Brian (or perhaps some of our members) would know better.
Here's an update on my data, and actually makes me think we need to hurry up and add this. :)
# of bounces: 1374 # of James bounces: 541 # of non-James bounces: 833 # of non-James bounces w/RFC 1894: 514 % of non-James bounces w/RFC 1894: 61.7%
I've only glanced at the spec so don't really know how much work it would take, but it seems this is much more widely adopted than I had thought.
-- Serge Knystautas President Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com p. 301.656.5501 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
