Todd makes my point exactly. As he notes, the rejection message tells me that the message was rejected by some system. It does not tell my why it was rejected. Thus, just like this message, it adds more to the noise to signal ratio! Cutler At 4/5/2007 12:28 PM -0700, todd glassey wrote: ----- Original Message ----- From: <mailto:james.cutler@consultant.com>James R. Cutler To: <mailto:nanog@nanog.org>nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 12:08 PM Subject: Re: Blocking mail from bad places At 4/5/2007 08:38 AM -0700, Thomas Leavitt wrote: One problem with the "bounce" solution is that <snip/> ========================== So, I (Cutler) add: And, even the best-intentioned bounce messages often give lots of data, but no information, thus increasing the noise to signal ratio. For example, Paul most likely knows what the following means to him. To me it just means I can't send mail to Paul. Except that this message tells you why you cant send mail to Paul - because Paul's system refused it, not because Paul's system didnt exist or that Paul's address was bad.
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.
A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:
paul@vix.com SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO:<paul@vix.com>: host sa.vix.com [204.152.187.1]: 553 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client host [209.86.89.61] blocked using reject-all.vix.com; created / reason
------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------
- James R. Cutler james.cutler@consultant.com - James R. Cutler james.cutler@consultant.com