From: Stuart D. Gathman [mailto:stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 2:18 PM
<...>
How about sending a *real* (DSN) "bounce"! Then it can be easily ignored
by innocent bystanders. That is my main complaint - not that it bounces,
but that it doesn't! It replies instead of bouncing.
Replying instead of bouncing is not really the issue. Both are bad choices,
as the addresses would have to be qualified by an external mechanism, such
as SPF. Unless you do a whole lot of work, you are more likely than not to
abuse an innocent third party.
The real issue, IMHO, is doing anything other than rejecting at the end of
DATA. Why accept a message that you have no intention of delivering?
--
Seth Goodman
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com