Randal, Phil wrote:
You're going to get bounce blowback anyhow, whether you use SAV or not.
Using Recipient Address Validation (or any kind of reject at the gateway
level without first scanning for spam) would also increase blowback if
junk mail is being sent via relays.
No Address validation at the gateway - this seems to result in the
fewest bounces:
SAV also creates an unreasonable burden on other people's mail servers
(in the same way that challenge response systems do, except challenge
response burdens both other people's mail servers AND other people).
Imagine 1,000,000 people all getting a spam that claims to be from you.
Now imagine if all of them are using SAV. You're about to get
1,000,000 connections to your mail server, all trying to validate your
address. For a message you didn't actually send. Meanwhile, you can't
receive legitimate mail during that window of time, because all of those
jerks using SAV are saturating your mail server.
Like I said, these types of call-back/SAV probes are not new. Verizon
has been doing it for years. If it was such a great anti-spam trick,
you'd think people would be marveling about how spam-free their Verizon
accounts are. I can't recall EVER having heard that.
SAV is one shade less polluting than Challenge-Response. (and that's
being polite... I consider people with Challenge-Response systems to be
total shit-bags, for example ... imagine what nice labels I might apply
to people using SAV systems)
