On 31 Jul 1998, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
: >>>>> "RSW" == Randall S Winchester <rsw@Glue.umd.edu> writes:
: RSW> It would be advantageous if majordomo could evaluate the smtp response
: RSW> codes and tray to make a determination of the bounce. In other words,
: RSW> majordomo should allow some bounces to happen, and ignore them, or at
: RSW> least note them as not a bad address issue.
: Well, we don't do any bounce processing at all right now; Majordomo just
: isn't involved in that.
Yes, but I wanted to comment on the issue so others could consider it. This
will bite others as they implement anti-spam policies.
: When we do implement it, we'll have to worry about these kinds of
: things. (Well, perhaps; I don't think anyone proposes removing an
: address that bounces only once.)
Well, as more sites turn off relaying it will get somewhat better. Once a
big spammer gets your majordmo list, it will be more then one that goes
though and bounced.
: But doing this kind of thing requires actual bounce parsing; VERPs (or
: the Mj2 analogue) can't help you there. Then again, most MTAs
: supporting those kinds of filters also use a reasonable bounce format.
Yes, most do.