On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Frank Ellermann wrote:
WTF is so difficult about this, the whole system doesn't work
if receivers ignore PermErrors silently, that's "engineeering"
for kids.
The advocates of "not rejecting" a PermError were actually recommending
rejecting with SMTP TEMPFAIL (451) instead of 550. This tells the
sender of the problem immediately (assuming they read their DSNs)
just like 550, and keeps on reminding them of the problem until they fix it or
the mail queue expires the message. When they finally do fix it, they don't
need to resend their mail (unless it expired from the queue).
Since both sides are "rejecting" the message, there is no actual
disagreement. The only issue is whether the reject should be
temporary or permanent. The answer to that depends on how
optimistic you are the people will ever actually fix their
SPF records.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flamis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.