El Lunes 25/01/2016, Valeri Galtsev escribió: > On Mon, January 25, 2016 8:36 am, Dattatec Mirrors wrote: [... snip ...] > >> 2) If you decide against 1), at least INFORM the senders that their > >> messages are filtered out. In the past week I thought I was being > >> ignored, as I did not receive such mails. This obviously is not a > >> feeling you want to nurture in admins supporting your project. > > > > Agreed, but are you sure the bounces weren't being filtered on your side? > > (A few minutes ago I sent a mail from a gmail address, still no bounce > > received). > > I would disagree here. Basically, it is on subscriber's side to find out > that the way you handle your mail and subscriptions to mail lists works. > Doing it differently will make centos mail list a source of "backscatter". > Those who maintain mail servers know whet it is. In a nut shell, someone > sends message forging From and making this from look as it is from me. > Message can not be sent forth, then the notification about that is sent to > me. To me, who has nothing to do with sending original message. This > "backscatter" is one of the spammers tactics. This is why "notification" > that the message can not be posted to mail list jeopardizes mail list > server. Good point! [... snip ...] > Disclaimer: I'm not affiliated with CentOS, so what I considered > unreasonable on your side, may be quite acceptable for CentOS. Mine is > just a point of view of "external observer" ;-) Ditto here :) Regards, -- Ricardo J. Barberis Senior SysAdmin / IT Architect DonWeb La Actitud Es Todo www.DonWeb.com _____