[87258] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Recording the return path (was Re: Clueless anti-virus
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Per Heldal)
Mon Dec 12 09:53:30 2005
From: "Per Heldal" <heldal@eml.cc>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <OF95556902.19B265D6-ON802570D5.004E02D1-802570D5.004E9058@btradianz.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 15:50:29 +0100
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 14:18:07 +0000, Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com said:
[snip]
> This whole discussion centered around the fact that
> innocent 3rd parties with no ability to act, were being
> sent large volumes of notifications. Once you remove the
> innocent 3rd party from the equation, the shape of the
> problem is quite different.
>
> I agree that notices should not be sent to addresses that
> are likely to be forged because then innocent 3rd parties
> are being spammed. However that does not mean that all
> notifications are bad.
>
It still doesn't make sense to send notification in any form other than
a "5xx stuff your malware..." response. Any MTA-admin with half a clue
seeing lots of such in the logs for outbound messages should know what
to do.
//per
--
Per Heldal
heldal@eml.cc
