This list is misconfigured, and Ed & I started talking to ourselves
instead of to the list;-((
Problem "B" can be assisted with "user education" but is generally a
losing battle. However, if one has control or influence on how networking
equipment is configured they may be able to invoke "protocol priority" and
give SMTP traffic a smaller piece of the bandwidth pie.
I said:
or bounce mail from unapproved lists, recognisable by the "Precedence:"
header. Perhaps approved mailing lists could be subscribed and fed to a
local news server.
Ed said:
I've 2 comments....
Bouncing is not a good idea since it doubles the usage of the bandwidth.
The "Precedence:" header is not used for mailing lists, only Usenet.
I say further:
1:
By 'bounce' i mean coax sendmail into declining to accept the message
accusing the sender of being a spammer. This is most likely to result in
the subscriber being unsubscribed and yeilding a nett saving of bandwidth.
A sendmail response saying '571 recipient not authorised to receive this'
would likely get the message across.
2:
Take a look at the headers of this missive;-)
--
Cheers
John Summerfield
http://os2.ami.com.au/os2/ for OS/2 support.
Configuration, networking, combined IBM ftpsites index.