Continuing this off-topic issue: On Mon 18 Apr 2005, Shachar Shemesh wrote: > John E. Malmberg wrote: > > >The I.P. address is listed in bl.spamcop.net as hitting spamtraps. > > Just so you know, spamcop view bounces as spam. According to them, you > should never send bounces. I believe the right approach is to convince > admins to drop spamcop from their RBL list, rather than remove the very > essential NACK SMTP has from all servers, as per spamcop's request.
There's a difference between giving a 5xx response during SMTP, and first accepting a message and then later bouncing it to the (supposed) envelope sender. I believe spamcop is protesting the latter, not the first. I agree with them. 20% of the junk I get are bogus bounces. Paul Slootman -- To unsubscribe or change options: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/rsync Before posting, read: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html