I suppose it would be useful... provided that the ancient action is set to bounce. Otherwise, no matter how old the dated address is, it only adds to the bulk in your pending folder. At least this way mail that is still expired but not ancient has a chance of being confirmed, but mail that is ancient just gets bounced and doesn't bloat the pending folder.
----- Original Message ----
From: Mark Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 9:08:45 AM
Subject: Extended Expiration?
From: Mark Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 9:08:45 AM
Subject: Extended Expiration?
I'm considering making some modifications to the
ACTION_EXPIRED_DATED. I've been getting innundated with SPAMS using
dated addresses that expired over two years ago. I'm assuming that
they've been culled from USENET. My thought was that I would create
two tiers of expiration: EXPIRED and ANCIENT, so that you might have:
ACTION_EXPIRED_DATED = "confirm"
ANCIENT_LIFETIME = 30d
ACTION_ANCIENT_DATED = "bounce"
What would happen is this:
After a dated address expired, but before ANCIENT_LIFETIME,
ACTION_EXPIRED_DATED would occur. After ANCIENT_LIFETIME,
ACTION_ANCIENT_DATED would occur.
Before I do the work on this, I was wondering if anyone (other than
me) thought that this would be a useful feature and if so, what the
probabilities would be of getting it incorporated into the codebase.
Thanks,
- Mark
P.S. I'm glad to see that TMDA has had some new releases. It's too
good a piece of software to stagnate.
_________________________________________________
tmda-workers mailing list ([email protected])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers
ACTION_EXPIRED_DATED. I've been getting innundated with SPAMS using
dated addresses that expired over two years ago. I'm assuming that
they've been culled from USENET. My thought was that I would create
two tiers of expiration: EXPIRED and ANCIENT, so that you might have:
ACTION_EXPIRED_DATED = "confirm"
ANCIENT_LIFETIME = 30d
ACTION_ANCIENT_DATED = "bounce"
What would happen is this:
After a dated address expired, but before ANCIENT_LIFETIME,
ACTION_EXPIRED_DATED would occur. After ANCIENT_LIFETIME,
ACTION_ANCIENT_DATED would occur.
Before I do the work on this, I was wondering if anyone (other than
me) thought that this would be a useful feature and if so, what the
probabilities would be of getting it incorporated into the codebase.
Thanks,
- Mark
P.S. I'm glad to see that TMDA has had some new releases. It's too
good a piece of software to stagnate.
_________________________________________________
tmda-workers mailing list ([email protected])
http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers
_________________________________________________ tmda-workers mailing list ([email protected]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-workers
