>With spam though a legitimate email account may not exist, so you are >just exposing your server as tied up to thousands of attempted resends...
nope, a reject by imgate is just like a reject by any smtp server, the incoming msg doesn't enter into the system, there is no mailer-daemon msg to generate. the risk you mention is ONLY if the MTA accepts the mail for delivery and then the MTA fails to deliver and then must notify/mailer-daemon the sender. >so I think deleting is a better choice personally. The fact is, most >users simply want most of this problem to 'go away' and they love our >system because we do just that in a qualified an sanctioned way. If >they identify any problems we fix them. same here. but we rarely get complaints for false positives or abuse. >Today on WinInfo Daily Update by Paul Thurrott: yep, I saw that. It means that mail admins who put their mailbox servers on internet as MX are more and more at risk getting in trouble. there must be a layer, an extra box, out front handling the nastiness and protecting the "user services" boxes. Len http://MenAndMice.com/DNS-training http://BIND8NT.MEIway.com : ISC BIND 8.2.4 for NT4 & W2K http://IMGate.MEIway.com : Build free, hi-perf, anti-abuse mail gateways Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html to be removed from this list. An Archive of this list is available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
