nanog mailing list archives
Re: REJECT-ON-SMTP-DATA (Re: Mail Server best practices - was: Pandora's Box of new TLDs)
From: Justin Shore <justin () justinshore com>
Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 01:28:57 -0500
I'd have to think of this one. I'm not sure what CanIt would do in such a case. A NDR may be the only way in that scenario. I'll sleep on it.
Justin Skywing wrote:
I think the problem that was being raised here was that past the DATA phase, if one recipient is going to receive the message and another is going to reject it, you have lost the ability to communicate this back to the sender (at least without an NDR). Thus the problem of mails disappearing into spam folder black holes is back in the multirecipient case when one is dealing with DATA and recipients have differing spam policies. - S
Current thread:
- REJECT-ON-SMTP-DATA (Re: Mail Server best practices - was: Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Jeroen Massar (Jul 01)
- Re: REJECT-ON-SMTP-DATA (Re: Mail Server best practices - was: Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Chris Owen (Jul 01)
- Re: REJECT-ON-SMTP-DATA (Re: Mail Server best practices - was: Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Phil Vandry (Jul 04)
- Re: REJECT-ON-SMTP-DATA (Re: Mail Server best practices - was: Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Justin Shore (Jul 04)
- RE: REJECT-ON-SMTP-DATA (Re: Mail Server best practices - was: Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Skywing (Jul 04)
- Re: REJECT-ON-SMTP-DATA (Re: Mail Server best practices - was: Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Justin Shore (Jul 04)
- Re: REJECT-ON-SMTP-DATA (Re: Mail Server best practices - was: Pandora's Box of new TLDs) Justin Shore (Jul 04)