On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, David Woodhouse wrote:
OK, this is slightly unfair. Of course the user _should_ have the new
email address, since it was returned in the 551 response and only a
_very_ broken mailer wouldn't actually give that text back.
But users don't read bounces. It's better to send it on to the correct
address automatically. You still haven't said what's _wrong_ with making
that requirement for SPF-publishing senders.
I think it should be up to the SPF-publishing sender. If their users
are numerous and of the type that don't read bounces, then they had better
take the trouble to implement auto redirecting 551 responses in the MTA.
On the other hand, for a small office like ours, all the users know
how to read - although the PHB needs to be reminded occasionally to
read the error message before asking me why his mail bounced.
We provide support for several hundred users (small potatos for you
big ISPs, I know). They all make a best effort to read bounces themselves
before calling us if they have trouble interpreting it.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Very few of our customers are going to have a pure Unix
or pure Windows environment." - Dennis Oldroyd, Microsoft Corporation