Scott Howard wrote: > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 5:20 PM, William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: > >> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Rich Kulawiec <r...@gsp.org> wrote: >> >>> Barracuda's engineers apparently think >>> that using SPF stops backscatter -- and it most emphatically does not. >>> >>> Reject gooooood, bounce baaaaaaad. [1] >>> >> Whine all you want about backscatter but until you propose a >> comprehensive solution that's still reasonably compatible with RFC >> 2821's section 3.7 you're just talking trash. >> > > In the case of Barracuda's long history of Backscatter the solution is > simple, and is implemented by most other mail vendors - it's called > "Don't accept incoming mail to an invalid recipient". > > Barracudas used to have no way of doing address validation for > incoming mail, so they would accept it and then bounce it when the > next hop (eg, the Exchange server) rejected the recipient address. > They finally fixed this a few years ago, and can not integrate with > LDAP (and possibly others) for address validation. Of course, it's > still down to the admin to implement it... > >
Actually they do (did?), as they run postfix, they should be configurable to use LDAP and a whole host of other methods. Michelle
