Some really newbie quesitons.

[John Rudd]

hermit921 wrote:
>
> At 01:16 PM 5/28/2004, Kevin Spicer wrote:
> >On Fri, 2004-05-28 at 16:35, Matt Kettler wrote:
> > > If you post-delivery bounce messages, a joe job victim has to block each
> > > and every server generating bounces, including yours. If you reject them,
> > > the joe job victim only has to block the one relay that the spammer abused
> > > as a source. MUCH simpler.
> >
> >I think its more correct to say that by rejecting at the SMTP layer you
> >push the bounce one step further upstream.  In many cases this will be
> >the originating server (which is fine) but this can also be another
> >innocent server (e.g. for people who use a store and forward service for
> >secondary MX).  Its important to understand that whilst rejecting at
> >SMTP level is better than sending a bounce it still causes problems for
> >many people.
> >
> >
>
> I don't view any system that sends me a lot of spam as innocent.  I
> consider it compromised, misconfigured, or deliberately malicious.
>

Then you don't understand how MX service works when applied to larger
cases (where you may not have control over your lower priority MX
servers).  It's not their job to spam scan/block for you (so they're not
misconfigured), and it IS your job to not drown them in messages that
they're holding for you but that you're not accepting.

-------------------------- MailScanner list ----------------------
To leave, send    leave mailscanner    to jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk
Before posting, please see the Most Asked Questions at
http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/     and the archives at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html