On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Rick Macdougall wrote: >> >> Marc Perkel wrote: >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Thanks Aaron, that is a good point. But I'm running Exim and I think I >>> can code it so that it will not generate backscatter. I'll have to design >>> that in up front. >>> >>> >> >> Interesting, how would you do that without dropping email (which is BAD). >> >> Rick >> > If the recipient is bad then no one would have got the email anyway. But > there wouldn't a a notification to the sender. I suppose I could make it > smarter so that if the message is blessed in one of my many white lists then > I would do a bounce message, otherwise not. > > OTOH, if someone is rarely down then the backscatter would probably be > minimal. This will probably be something to experiment with. >
no, you will get massive amounts of mail sent to invalid user accounts regardless of whether the primary is online or not. in fact, when the primary is online the ratio of mail for invalid vs valid will be higher. if you accept these messages, you are responsible to send NDR when the primary rejects them. if you don't do this, you break rfc compliance. yes, it is usually a waste of everyone's time, but the one time the CEO of your client's #1 partner mistypes an email address on a critical message and doesn't get any error back, things go to crap. be careful with this. consider a cached callout scheme as mention in an earlier post. it isn't perfect but it is probably good enough and remains rfc compliant.
