John Jolet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sunday 14 November 2004 9:17 am, Julian Mehnle wrote: > > [...] I outright reject unwanted messages during the SMTP transaction, > > so the sender gets notified. [...] > > I would agree with that practice, except in this day and age of spoofed > addresses and zombies, that bounce is (a) unlikely to be read and (b) > unlikely even to go to the right place.
*My* mail servers don't create bounce messages, they just reject using an SMTP error code. So I'm definitely not responsible for any bounce messages that go to the wrong place. Besides, if mail servers started using SPF (or similar authentication techniques) to verify envelope sender addresses, whoever publishes SPF records for his domains would be guaranteed not to receive unjustified bounce messages from those servers. _That_ is the right way of combating misdirected bounces. Not rejecting/bouncing unwanted messages would just be fighting the symptoms. _______________________________________________ http://lists.clamav.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clamav-users
