From: /dev/rob0 (rob0gmx.co.uk)
Date: Tue Nov 14 2006 - 11:29:21 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tuesday 14 November 2006 11:09, Sheldon T. Hall wrote:
> > > Do not even consider this as a spam-reduction measure.
> >
> > Agreed, but if the challenge comes in the form of rejection in
> > SMTP, there's no real abuse being committed. Real senders get the
> > bounces from their own server, not from the challenger.
>
> Yes, but various mail agents have been known to "edit" the SMTP
> rejection, so all the real sender gets is "Sorry, your mail didn't
> make it" or something similarly vague. You can't count on the sender
> being able to see an SMPT-time challenge.

I have a hard time feeling sorry for those users. Fortunately I'm not
running an ISP which has to support any lousy Windows MUA. :) I tell
users they can contact Microsoft support with questions unless they
choose a decent MUA. A polite way of saying "get lost." :)

I write good rejection messages. Even "HELO localhost" gets an
informative message from me, the fact that no human sender has ever
seen it notwithstanding. I do my part to ensure that SMTP works.

People who insist on using broken mail software can expect breakage.
With the increasing acceptance of Thunderbird, which is well-behaved
and freely available, policies like mine seem to be catching on.
--
    Offlist mail to this address is discarded unless
    "/dev/rob0" or "not-spam" is in Subject: header

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]