On 7/5/02 10:23 PM, "Russ Allbery" <rra@stanford.edu> wrote:
> Honestly, Brent, if I were you, I'd remove from this mailing list whoever
> it is who's subscribed from behind an MTA that sends bounces to the
> Errors-To header on the grounds that their mail system is broken
On the other hand, on some of my systems, I still set errors-to. Yes, it's
deprecated. Yes, lots of sites ignore it (and should). But not everyone does
and it's useful as a way of nudging that traffic to the "right" place, which
reduces my hassle factor.
In general, as long as errors-to points to where the envelope goes, it's
harmless. Especially since some of these sites will return it to the "From"
address (REALLY the wrong thing) if it's not there. And since I can tweak
the headers to avoid that, I do, rather than say "you're broken, you must
die". I save that for sites that are really broken.
Fortunately, the one server that I've had problems with sending bounces back
to the From address turned out to be (a) a known bug in a recalled version
that (b) much to their surprise re-appeared in a later version (oops). But
they've issued a beta, and it'll soon be formally fixed -- and THEN I can
tell those sites to upgrade of be banned with a clear conscience (it's my
guess most of the sites running the recalled version are pirates, actually,
since they're located in sweden and should have upgraded two years ago...)
IMHO, I guess, if this is a problem with a server, the answer is to try to
get them to fix it, not just block them. In many cases, it's a laggard
upgrade. But it's nice ot know that ahead of time before you start throwing
blocks up. You can come across looking rather jerkfaced if you do that....
--
Chuq Von Rospach, Architech
chuqui@plaidworks.com -- http://www.chuqui.com/
Someday, we'll look back on this, laugh
nervously and change the subject.
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
