--On 29 June 2010 10:51:00 +0100 David Woodhouse <dwmw2@???>
wrote:
> n Mon, 2010-06-28 at 11:48 +0100, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>> Well, the backscatter issue means that we have no choice but to try to
>> do that. But that's a bad thing. It would be a much better world in
>> which we were able to accept such messages, and then generate a bounce.
>> Why? Because bounce messages have the potential to be more
>> user-friendly.
>
> Users still won't bother to read them, and will prefer to ask a sysadmin
> who will have read the words on the user's screen to them, before the
> user actually understands.
Well, that will often be the case. I'm just saying that a bounce message
has more chance of conveying useful information if its created by the
receiving server than the sending server. Why? Because the best the sending
server can do is try to interpret the SMTP (enhanced?) error code, and wrap
the SMTP error text.
Even if this just makes life easier for the admin, then that's progress.
--
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/
