Re: Recipient validation - WAS: Re: Moderated posts?
On 10/14/2014 10:15 AM, Chris Bannister <cbannister@slingshot.co.nz> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 08:05:00AM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
>>> To bounce all of those invalid addresses not only would further
>>> increase the amount of junk on the internet,
>> That is pure and absolute nonsense. The vast majority of spam comes from
>> botnets, and *rejecting* garbage from these results in ZERO additional
>> smtp traffic.
> Are you confusing drop and reject? Doesn't a reject send a response
> back, ie traffic, whereas a drop doesn't?
No. An SMTP REJECT does not 'send' any additional traffic. It simply
closes the connection with the appropriate 'response code', generally a
55# code.
It then falls to the sending server to inform the sender of the 'failure
to communicate' - which, if the sender is a botnet, won't happen.
Rejecting will actually *reduce* traffic, because it doesn't accept the
entire messages, it slams the door at the RCPT-TO stage.
Reply to: