On Thu, 25 Aug 2016 12:36:19 -0700
"Michael J Wise" <mjw...@kapu.net> wrote:
> > No!  Even though you don't have to have a mailbox to fill up (you
> > can direct catch-all to /dev/null) this is still a bad idea.  If
> > someone sends you an important message at li...@lazygranch.com it
> > will be silently ignored.  If you don't have a catch-all the
> > message will bounce and the sender will realize that he made a typo
> > and resend it.  
> 
> This fails badly for many security and privacy reasons if you are
> doing anything other than running a personal, vanity domain.

No, it's quite the opposite.  I have clients who expect their email to
behave in a very clearly defined way.  If someone sends an email to my
system it must do one of two things - be delivered to to a user (or at
least his spam filter) or bounced back to the sender. Anything else is a
failure. I don't want to hear that my client missed a big sale because
of a typo on their prospective client's part.

-- 
D'Arcy J.M. Cain
System Administrator, Vex.Net
http://www.Vex.Net/ IM:da...@vex.net
VoIP: sip:da...@vex.net

Reply via email to