> > So it takes 20 days for a bad address to get kicked off?
> That's right. This gives people time to fix configuration errors.
A configuration error that lasts 20 days is more than just a configuration
> > so a bad address doesn't get kicked off the list
> > until I've sent out as many as 2000 messages that won't be delivered??
> Right. What's the problem? It's not as if you have to read the bounces.
> Only the first one is saved, so you don't need much disk space.
As others have pointed out, bandwidth is one problem. I have a dinky little
33KB PPP link to the Internet that's handling over 500,000 messages/month,
plus web traffic, etc. Cutting out 2000 messages might not be a huge savings,
but like my grandmother's chicken soup, it couldn't hurt! Forgive me my
age here, I started programming back in the days when an 8K machine was
considered LARGE, and being parsimonious of memory, disk, and CPU time was a
virtue. I guess I would never make it working for Microsoft. :-)
> Some users won't read the warning, but many users appreciate seeing the
> missing message numbers and the first bounce message.
But I thought you were only saving the first bounce, so you must be saving the
missing messages somewhere else, and that has got to take up SOME disk space.
Perhaps you have unlimited resources, but I don't.
> > And I think a lot of system administrators would take umbrage at your
> > statement that bouncing messages because of an exceeded quota is foolish.
> Bouncing messages because of a _temporarily_ exceeded quota is a bug.
> This bug was in many versions of binmail but was fixed in mail.local.
Um, define temporary here. 5 minutes? 30 minutes? 20 days?
> > I'm lost here. If my mail is being forwarded to a bad address,
> ``You forward copies of incoming mail to a summer account.'' Copies.
OK, so if I'm keeping a copy at my main account, what do I need the list
of missing messages for?
> You obviously have no idea what VERPs are, so I don't understand how you
> could possibly feel competent to contradict my comments about them.
I think I said that I'm not an expert. I'm not on this list because I think
I'm a net.god, I'm on it to learn. Can't you be informative or instructive
without insulting me, too?
> And I would have answered, ``Yes. DSN is obsolete. Subscribe to the
> ezmlm mailing list and you'll see how VERPs work.''
At the moment, I'm not all that interested in subjecting myself to your
abuse in your own sandbox.