Reject vs. bounce

[Tim Boyer]

On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 18:19:12 +0200 (CAT), Jim Holland <mailscanner at mango.zw>
wrote:

<snip>

>
>Once mail has been accepted then why not quarantine all mail that is 
>flagged as spam?
>
>An essential component of managing spam is to notify users of what has
>been rejected, and to quarantine the marginal mail rather than deleting it
>or rejecting it.  We send out two separate notifications per day to our
>users - one that indicates the mail that has been bounced at SMTP time,
>with reports in the following format:
>
>	Oct  2 14:56:02
>	    sender: vczr at chrispowerz.wanadoo.co.uk
>	    recip:  user at mango.zw
>	    server: dsl.static81214188253.ttnet.net.tr
>
>and the other that indicates mail that has been quarantined (where more 
>information is available for the report):
>
>	02 Oct 2006 06:30:49
>	    From:       "PokerBot Max" <Akins_bend at hotmail.com>
>	    Server:     static-66-16-28-242.dsl.cavtel.net [66.16.28.242]
>	    Date:       Sun 01 Oct 2006 23:28:06 -0600
>	    Subject:    Make Money Online with PokerBot
>	    Saved as:   user at mango.zw 20061002/spam/k924USZ9020056
>
>The server information is useful for users to quickly pick out the origin
>of the message and often gives a very good indication of the likelihood of
>the mail being genuine or not.
>
>I guess that we would probably bounce or block around 85% of incoming 
>connections, with the remainder being split between genuine and 
>quarantined mail.  We typically quarantine only around 650 messages per 
>day, so the storage requirement for our 2500 users is not significant - we 
>keep it for 90 days.
>
>Regards
>
>Jim Holland
>System Administrator
>MANGO - Zimbabwe's non-profit e-mail service

I'm rejecting 2,000 per day for 50 users.  If I quarantined and had them go
through them, it would be as time-consuming as letting them go through.

-- 
tim boyer
tim at denmantire.com