[Mailman-Developers] Re: [Mailman-Users] Bounce Options

Dan Wilder dan@ssc.com
Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:55:26 -0800

On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 04:04:23PM -0500, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
> [Changing followups to mailman-developers as this discussion really
> belongs there.  -BAW]
> >>>>> "DW" == Dan Wilder <dan@ssc.com> writes:
>     DW> I guess I'm wondering if anybody recalls the intent of this
>     DW> code.
> The only person who ever had a chance of understanding the intent is
> John Viega, but he's been removed from Mailman hacking for so long, I
> doubt even he remembers.


So what's a reasonable intent for bounce handling?  

Here's a sketch.  No doubt I misunderstand important points.
Perhaps others would be kind enough to comment.

Presuming the list is configured for automatic bounce handling
at all, it would seem reasonable to claim that there are 
circumstances under which bounce handling might unsubscribe or 
disable mail to a subscriber.

The sporadic bounce probably shouldn't cause this sort of action.
So, there should be some forgiveness mechanism in place.

Several bounces over a short period of time might reasonably
be forgiven, or treated as a single bounce.  Many situations
that will cause a bounce involve some misconfiguration which
the conscientious sysadmin will shamefacedly correct as soon as
it is brought to his or her attention.  A heavily trafficked
list might not want to unsubscribe even members who cause several
bounces, providing these fall within a short period of time.

Several bounces over a longer period of time might be cause
for suspension, even if posts are accepted between.

The existing bounce handling makes some distinction I don't
understand between "fatal" bounces and "nonfatal" bounces.  
Is this "no such user" versus "host busy", for example?

 Dan Wilder <dan@ssc.com>   Technical Manager & Editor
 SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549   Phone:  206-782-8808
 Seattle, WA  98155-0549    URL http://embedded.linuxjournal.com/