--On 24 May 2010 13:41:37 -0700 Steve Atkins
I think that's probably the most principled thing to do.
For self-protection, there's also the option of NOT sending the message
with a VERPed sender address. That would mean that a subsequent
rejection should not count against the recipient. If the list is using
some other mechanism to count rejections, then that mechanism should
not be used.
If the recipient is rejecting mail from the list, then the list should
stop attempting to send mail to that recipient. It should not try and
guess why the mail is no longer wanted.
No, there are plenty of reasons that a recipient might reject *some* email
from a list, but not the rest. For example, the recipient site might be
more fussy about RFC compliance in the email. I've been unsubscribed from
Yahoo lists because they relayed mail with ';' separating email addresses
in sender headers.
We really don't want people to use ADSP (or, much worse, DKIM) as
an excuse for not handling bounces nor for sending unwanted email.
No, and of course a site needn't reject ADSP mail with broken signatures.
Indeed, to protect it's members from unwanted unsubscriptions, it might be
better to drop the email than reject it. But, then the sender might never
discover what they're doing wrong. If the recipient rejects the message,
then the list should be able to bounce back to the sender, since it was
originally properly signed.
IT Services, University of Sussex
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to