From: Brad Templeton (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Sep 30 1997 - 12:22:48 CDT
On Sep 30, 1997 at 03:46:50PM +0100, Charles Lindsey wrote:
> Brad Templeton <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Yes, but that mechanism only works when several versions of a message
> converge at one site (and then, one of them is chosen at random). If, as
> you suggest, sites discovering the error try to send it directly to the
> site in the From/Sender, then you have invented a nice mailbomb for the
> injecting site.
THere is no easy way to deal with multiple versions of errors on the
same message, nor a big call to. If you have a bug, you fix it, and if
there is still a bug, you will get the next error message on the next post.
This is not the cause of a mailbomb, it is the solution to the mailbomb.
Frankly, I don't think relayers should send messages at all, that should
be up to watch-daemons wherever possible. However, sometiems they have
to since droppng bad input on the ground without any diagnostic is not
an acceptable software design to me, and I hope nobody here thinks it is.