[65521] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: incorrect spam setups cause spool messes on forwarders
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Mon Dec 1 14:01:48 2003
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 13:58:31 -0500
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh@outblaze.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <E1AQt8G-0002Qk-2F@ran.psg.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Randy Bush writes on 12/1/2003 1:50 PM:
>
> interesting but utterly irrelevant. the question was not how
> verison decided it was spam. the point was that their server
> returned a 450 as opposed to a 5xx (550 looks good), and this
> causes net damage.
>
They haven't yet determined that it is spam. So, RFC nitpicking wise,
they are right.
On the other hand, from a mail operations standpoint, I personally feel
that sender verification, graylisting and other methods that rely on
4xx'ing email are a bad idea, as they makes things inconvenient for a
whole lot of ISPs ... and because these emails have to be either 5xx'd
or trashed sometime sooner or later.
--
srs (postmaster|suresh)@outblaze.com // gpg : EDEDEFB9
manager, outblaze.com security and antispam operations
