| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: List removals |
| Date: | 2017-12-04 19:03:50 |
| Message-ID: | 29132.1512414230@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-www |
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
> On 12/04/2017 03:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think a bounce would be fine if the bounce message contained something
>> like "this list is inactive, please send to <xxx(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
>> instead". How feasible is that?
> doable - but the challenge there is that if we want to generate a proper
> bounce we will have to accept the mail and send back a bounce - that
> however makes us vulnerable to bounce blow-back (if say somebody fakes a
> an email sender and we direct the bounce in that direction back).
Yeah, probably not great.
> The other option is to reject the RCPT TO at SMTP time with a message
> like the above on our frontends - the problem there is that is it up the
> sending MTA to wrap that text into a bounce that might or might not be
> parsable by a human :/
Seems to me that that's an OK compromise. If people are using MTAs that
fail to expose the rejection message, that's their problem not ours.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-12-04 19:30:27 | Re: List removals |
| Previous Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2017-12-04 18:03:38 | Re: List removals |