[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
I used the words "more and more" far too many times in that mail ;-) Best regards Mick E: mick@xxxxxxxxxxxx > From: Mick Vaites <mick@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Reply-To: <list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:08:20 +0100 > To: <list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [LUG] email > > I'm gobsmacked that you would advocate an ISP dropping a customers email > bounces but at the same time wouldn't advise a customer to do it themselves > - or am I not reading you right ? > > Issuing a 4xx puts the responsibility back on the originator of the message > to resend the message which may not happen for some time. Whereas the backup > MX could have more friendly rules for it's customers on resending - and thus > reducing the delay in getting the email to the person. > > I take your point about Spammers assuming they are the ones actually sending > them mail directly to the MX's. My understanding however is that more and > more spam gets sent via Bot's. Which uses a customers ISP's outbound smtp > server. We're seeing more and more customers being hit this way. > > Reference your comments on secondary MX's -- since the advent of ADSL more > and more customers are using us as backup MX's or Smart hosts. Principally > because the RBL's are picking on the ADSL IP space more and more. > > Best regards > > Mick > > E: mick@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > > >> From: James Fidell <james@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Organization: CloudNine Consultants Ltd., Pitsford Hill Farm, Pitsford Hill, >> Wiveliscombe, Somerset TA4 2RR. Reg. No. 3317659 >> Reply-To: <list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 16:30:11 +0100 >> To: <list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Subject: Re: [LUG] email >> >> Mick Vaites wrote: >> >>> However as we're talking ISP backup MX or Smarthost - they cannot drop >>> bounces on behalf of their customer as it might be needed genuinely. >> >> Of course they can. It's possible, and there are people who do it. As >> I said in my previous email though, that doesn't mean it's easy. >> >> I'd bet, however, that if a customer with a primary MX who listed their >> ISP's backup MX in their DNS just had the ISP give a 4xx error >> immediately after the SMTP RCPT, just about no-one would notice a >> difference with delivery of genuine email and there'd be less spam and >> backscatter getting delivered. >> >> James >> >> -- >> The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG >> http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list >> FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html > > > -- > The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG > http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list > FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html