unwise filtering policy from cox.net

Wed Nov 21 00:21:17 UTC 2007

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 18:45:50 EST, "Raymond L. Corbin" said:
> Heh better then my all time favorite was the "mailbox is full" reply
> from an abuse@ address for an ISP based in Nigeria who had a few servers
> trying to open umpteen fraud accounts :D

I've seen my share of 800-pound gorillas (we're talking the 10M+ customer
range) who have bounced postmaster@ and/or abuse@ due to 'mailbox is full'. So
it isn't just small ISPs in little corners of the world...

My favorite was an abuse@ bounce from a smaller shop that read something like:

451 <abuse at smallshop.com> Mailbox Full of complaints, even though we nuked their butts 3 days ago.

(I'm sure many readers of the list know *that* feeling - you found and fixed
the problem before the first complaint arrives, but you still get deluged by
more complaints for another week or so...)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20071120/78bdf86a/attachment.sig>