"Todd A. Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Charter is a rotten ISP, but they probably typify the industry. One of > Charter's lame policies is that they refuse to process bounces for a > number of domains such as gmail, presumably in a non-RFC compliant way > to prevent joe jobs. > > Anyway, I get a lot of transactions like this: > > Jun 1 10:53:17 penguin postfix/smtp[21794]: E4CF237CA9: > to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, relay=smtp.charter.net[209.225.8.224]:25, > delay=0.94, delays=0.05/0.07/0.66/0.16, dsn=5.0.0, status=bounced > (host smtp.charter.net[209.225.8.224] said: 550 relaying mail to > gmail.com is not allowed (in reply to RCPT TO command)) > > when TMDA attempts to send its challenge message. So, while TMDA is > obviously working as designed, it raises a few questions: > > 1. Should challenges be bounces, or new messages? Bounces help > prevent joe jobs, but obviously run afoul of relay restrictions. > > 2. If they remain bounces, how should undeliverable errors be > handled? Currently, messages remain in the pending queue, but > perhaps other configurable actions (hold, discard, or deliver to > known-spam folder) might be more appropriate. > > The current flaw isn't in TMDA, but I think the question of how TMDA can > handle ISP ignorance is a good one to discuss.
Most of TMDA's behavior in this area is governed by RFC 3834 http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3834.html _____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list (tmda-users@tmda.net) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
