[Top] [All Lists]

Re: email-arch: bounce vs... return?

2007-10-15 09:19:59

On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 11:24:51AM -0400, David F. Skoll wrote:

Jeff Macdonald wrote:

perhaps 'inline-bounce' is better? Or 'inband-bounce'? I've heard of
both from my MTA vendor.

"Bounce" has yet another meaning.  I believe Mutt refers to
redirecting e-mail as "bouncing" it.  In other words, if mail from
someone(_at_)example(_dot_)net comes in to bob(_at_)example(_dot_)com, Bob 
can "bounce" it
to sue(_at_)example(_dot_)org and it appears to come from 

I think we should avoid "bounce" completely.  We should say "reject
with an SMTP failure code" and "generate a failure notification message"
because those phrases are unambiguous.

Ah, very clear indeed.

:: Jeff Macdonald | Director of Messaging Technologies
:: e-Dialog | jmacdonald(_at_)e-dialog(_dot_)com
:: 131 Hartwell Ave. | Lexington, MA 02421 
:: v: 781-372-1922 | f: 781-863-8118