[Mailman-Developers] Re: Bounce removal parameters default values

[Barry Warsaw]

On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 11:57, Greg Stark wrote:

> I should not be removed from a mailing list purely on the basis of bounces of
> uncontrolled messages. The messages that bounced could have been spam or
> outlook worms or whatever.

In the default configuration, you won't be.  You might get /disabled/
but you won't get removed, unless your MTA also bounces the 3 notices
that Mailman sends out at regular intervals to warn disabled users of
their subscription status.

> Before removing a subscriber mailman should send a message with known content
> testing the address. Only if such a message bounces should a user be dropped.

That's what it does.  The default is to send 3 notices over the course
of 3 weeks.  Each of those notices contains a url you need to click on
to re-instate your subscription.  We can't test for a negative (i.e.
that the notices don't bounce) so you need to take explicit action to
get re-enabled.

> As it is I'm being removed from mailing lists whenever a new Outlook worm
> appears and sends multiple messages in a row. Or a new spammer discovers a
> list I'm on and sends multiple messages in a row to the list.
> 
> It's especially bad on low-volume lists where it's quite possible for spam or
> Outlook worm messages to be the only messages for days.

Admins of low volume lists might want to change some of the bounce
processing defaults.  However, by default if a list gets no bounces from
you in 7 days, it considers any previous bounce info to be stale and
throws it away.  So the list would need to get one bounce per day from
you for 5 days in a row for you to get disabled.

The other option I would suggest is that list owners start turning on
personalization, in order to take advantage of VERP.  I think it's
harder to get spoof-disabled when VERP is enabled because then Mailman
looks for the bouncing address in the encoded recipient header.

But I'm open to specific suggestions for improvement.
-Barry