On Tue 30 Aug 2016 at 15:05:02 -0400, Henning Follmann wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 05:49:34PM +0100, Joe wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 09:59:42 -0400 > > Henning Follmann <hfollm...@itcfollmann.com> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 02:52:14PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > > > On Tuesday 30 August 2016 14:05:36 Stefan Monnier wrote: > > > > > "shocked that anyone would want to design or use an > > > > > unreliable messaging system" > > > > > > > > Email is getting less and less reliable, so have you given up using > > > > it?? :-( > > > > > > > > Lisi > > > > > > > > > > However, why email is still reliable, because a proper setup provides > > > you with a well defined error messages (in case it is not delivered). > > > > > > > If an email is designated as spam, it will be *silently* dropped. It > > took mail admins a long time to realise that if a message was spam, the > > last thing they should do with it is to 'return' it to the apparent > > 'sender' as part of a bounce message. > > > > You have a much too simplistic view of todays anti-spam measures. > > If an smtp server tries to deliver a messages, usually the first the > receiving server does, during the helo, checking if the sending server is > blacklisted. If blacklisted any attempt to deliver any mail will be denied > and the sender will receive a proper 5XX error message.
brian@desktop:~$ telnet itcfollmann.com 25 Trying 96.242.112.3... Connected to itcfollmann.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 newton.itcfollmann.com ESMTP Postfix (Debian/GNU) helo spammershaven.com 250 newton.itcfollmann.com mail from:yourneighbourhoodspam...@gmail.com 250 2.1.0 Ok rcpt to:hfollm...@itcfollmann.com 450 4.2.0 <hfollm...@itcfollmann.com>: Recipient address rejected: Greylisted, see http://postgrey.schweikert.ch/help/itcfollmann.com.html I don't really want to go to the data command or go through this greylisting business but the helo command seems acceptable to your server.
