On Tue, 2011-07-12 at 17:23 +0200, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote: > Is disabling a list a temporary measure? If it is, should the server reply a > temporary error?
In my humble opinion, an intentionally disabled list should cause the mail system to generate a 500 class error (permanent error). 400 class errors (temporary errors) are generally reserved for situations where the _intention_ is that the mail should go through but is prevented from doing so by problems for which a solution is in progress. A 400 class error causes the originating system to cache and re-try delivery, so if a list returns a 400 class error, it's just "delayed", not truly "disabled". This may be a fine distinction, and if a list is disabled for technical reasons with the intention of bringing it back up in short order without losing traffic, then perhaps a 400 class error would be more appropriate. -- Lindsay Haisley | "We have met the enemy, and it is us." FMP Computer Services | 512-259-1190 | -- Pogo http://www.fmp.com | _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
