On 18/01/2007, at 10:18 AM, Phil Scarratt wrote:
Rev Simon Rumble wrote:This one time, at band camp, Scott Ragen wrote:IMHO its better for a sender to get "Your Mail has been rejected due to suspected spam", then the email getting lost in the spam box never to be seen.Except that they don't get that message. Instead they get a long, cryptic bounce message which _might_ include the the text the receiving MTA sends buried somewhere inside it. In my experience users don't read beyond the "your message cannot be delivered", even moderately technical users. This is something the MTAs generating the bounce message could be a _lot_ better at.And then people start getting bounced messages for emails they didn't even send (faked from address) which adds to the spam. IMHO spam should not be bounced.
Indeed. The servers I manage, if I start seeing spam (or virus notifications) bounced from a server, the domain of the server responsible can expect to start seeing "550 - Your message is rejected because your admin is a moron". It's also the general opinion of every other full-time mail admin I know. Same reason you should never send the "sender" of a virus a notification telling them to check their PC - they, in all probability, did not send the message.
Cheers, James
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
