In message <5 .
"Roger B.A. Klorese" <rogerk @
>At 05:06 PM 10/20/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>>Bounces have the unique quality of have a null return envelope.
>>Filter on that and you'll have no problem. (
>With the number of sites violating RFCs and rejecting null-envelope bounce
>messages, my list owners are not getting their lists' bounces. I am
>seriously considering putting in a return address on them from here on.
The above comment is very ambiguous, but at least one interpretation of
it is somewhat worrisome (to me at least).
I don't want to misinterpret, so I need to ask you if you would mind
clarifying what you meant to say.
Are you running mailing lists (from your site) on bahalf of other parties
and are you then auto-forwarding any bounce messages that come back, to
your site (for any of the mailings sent for those mailing lists) to the
respective ``list owners'' at other sites?
P.S. Yes, a few Really Dumb sites (e.g. myrealbox.com) have elected
to reject _all_ incoming mail that carries a null envelope sender address.
They do this as a hopelessly misguided attempt at spam control, when what
they should clearly be doing instead is using some program like the one
I mentioned here (at the start of this thread) which could rid them of
the spam flotsam while still allowing legitimate non-deliverable bounce
messages (and legitimate autoresponder response messages) through.