Gee, and here I was thinking that maybe for once we could discuss a substantive topic without resorting to calling each other names. Oh well. > The answer is quite simple: list servers (and mailbots, and vacation > bots and ANYTHING that auto-responds) needs to rate-limit their > replies to an address. Wtih a vacation bot it's simple, and the > standard vacation program has that feature. Rate limiting on the administrative and archive server ends of a MLM sounds like not only a doable but a very worthwhile feature. It would need to be tuneable, of course, especially with regards to archive or info files. One approach to this would be to rate limit non-member addresses differently than list member addresses, I suppose. -- Mike Nolan
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Tim Pierce
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Chuq Von Rospach
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? murr rhame
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Chuq Von Rospach
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Paul Hoffman / IMC
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Tim Pierce
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Chuq Von Rospach
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Tim Pierce
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Chuq Von Rospach
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? SRE
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Mike Nolan
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Bernie Cosell
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? murr rhame
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Chuq Von Rospach
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? David W. Tamkin
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Chuq Von Rospach
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Chuq Von Rospach
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Chuq Von Rospach
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Margaret Levine Young
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? murr rhame
- Re: Is mailback validation still safe? Margaret Levine Young
