Re: Meta-topic: Spam filtering and bounced messages

[Anthony W. Youngman]

In message <address@hidden>, Patrick Hubers 
<address@hidden> writes
> > Except, to the best of my knowledge, "bounce" means that *I* send a 
> > DSN  back to the original sender, and "reject" means that the relay is 
> > honour-bound to send a DSN back to the original sender.
> >  The only practical difference is who sends the DSN. And as I said, 
> > in my  case (because "download and drop" is not a practical option) 
> > there is no  way I can suppress the sending of the DSN.
>
> This is getting *very* off topic, but:
>
> As David R. Linn said, bounce and reject are *not* the same. Rejecting 
> means that the receiving SMTP-server refuses to accept the message at 
> all (return a 550 response), meaning the sending SMTP-server can't 
> deliver the message at all. Bouncing means that the receiving server 
> *does* accept the message, but then sends a message back to the *email 
> address* in the message envelope, which may have nothing to do with the 
> actual sender.

In which case, I *A*M* rejecting, and yet I still get this message 
saying I've been suspended.

When I configure my reject rules, my mail "client" sends a 550 back to 
the relay. I presume that my ISP's mail server is doing the same. The 
problem is, if it's come from the sender's ISP's relay servers, I bet 
the effect is the same as what you call a bounce.

But - to put it simply - I *know* I'd doing what you call rejecting, I 
send a 550, and it still gets me dropped from the list.

Cheers,
Wol
--
Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk
HEX wondered how much he should tell the Wizards. He felt it would not be a
good idea to burden them with too much input. Hex always thought of his reports
as Lies-to-People.
The Science of Discworld : (c) Terry Pratchett 1999