On Mon, 3 Sep 90 20:27:18 O Eric Thomas said: > ... Mail from any user matching one of the patterns in the file >would be subjected to a special treatment, depending on the control word >following the pattern. It could be discarded and forgotten about, or >transferred to the postmaster without being replied to, or result in a >nastygram back saying that we are very sorry but your gateway is causing >us problems so you will not be able to send commands until you get the >gatemaster to fix his code. ... > >Does this sound like the right solution to the problem? > > Eric A fourth alternative is that if mail can be identified as being associated with some list, process it according to the Errors-to: of that list. If the Errors-to: indicates the owners, then the load on the postmaster would be reduced. It would also allow owners to remove offending addresses if the reject notice is a non-standard form of "no such user at this site" or whatever. As the owner of several lists, I would prefer this method. If I start getting too many useless messages from a gateway, then I would likely ask my postmaster to take the "black hole" option for that address. ---Tom Reid