Re: more bad ideas, was uncooperative DNSBLs, was several messages

["Chris Lewis" <[e-mail]>]

John Levine wrote:
>> For instance, what would happen if mail servers provided feedback to
>> both senders (on a per message basis in the form of NDNs)
> 
> Well, since 95% of all mail is spam, and all the spam has fake return
> addresses, you'd increase the amount of bogus NDNs by more than an
> order of magnitude.  No thanks.
> 
> Incidentally, on a bad day I already get 400,000 NDNs from mail that I
> didn't send, just from the minority of MTAs that send NDNs in response
> to spam now.  This is not a hypothetical problem.

Point of order: is NDN "produce bounce" or does it include "reject"?

In my response I took NDN to mean "reject".  Not bounce.

Filters should never bounce (and that would go in a filtering BCP).
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf