St. wrote:
>      I bet. I'm thinking about the guy that got 10,000 a SECOND in that link 
> Gilles and John posted.

I was talking about making a mistake that causes your own code to spam 
you. :-)

> I guess I could just 
> change our email addy on our site to a spare one for now and let this 
> episode fade out even if it is weeks. 

If they're bouncing to postmaster, it doesn't matter what *your* site 
says. You're going to get bounces to postmaster because there's no such 
AOL user or something.

> I think I've got about 75% of them 
> pointing to the DI folder now, so it's not a massive problem.

If you can afford the bandwidth, it's not really a problem if you can 
get them tossed out reliably.

Generally, bounces delivered to "postmaster" don't need to be looked at 
unless one of your users asks why it's bouncing after they threw out the 
bounce message *they* received. (Or unless of course it's bouncing 
because you're testing the configuration that isn't working right yet, 
for example.) It's more a "courtesy cc" of the bounce message than 
anything.

Me, I'd throw away anything coming into postmaster until it calms down. 
Nowadays, the postmaster address is useless exactly because of this sort 
of problem.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>>   Lol, I think I'm going to get the record easy with this! There are 1371
>> now, so no thanks, my friend. :) I wonder what's happening? Do you know
>> the emails I mean? It's those Mailer-Daemon/mail delivery subsystem
>> emails.
> 
> Reminds me of the time when one of my University lecturers had forwarded
> his
> Engineering Dept email to his University email address.  Thing was, he
> forgot that he already had forwarded his main email address to the eng
> dept.
> server!  I turned up for a meeting with him while he was on the phone to
> IT saying he had several thousand more new mails each time he tried to
> open his Inbox :-)

I once tried such a forward with free email accounts. They're smart enough
to notice. Second or third forward and it bounces back saying "forward
loop".

Post a reply to this message

"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message 
news:482c8366$1@news.povray.org...
> St. wrote:
>>      I bet. I'm thinking about the guy that got 10,000 a SECOND in that 
>> link Gilles and John posted.
>
> I was talking about making a mistake that causes your own code to spam 
> you. :-)

   Heh, ok, I was wondering what you were talking about.  ;)


>
>> I guess I could just change our email addy on our site to a spare one for 
>> now and let this episode fade out even if it is weeks.
>
> If they're bouncing to postmaster, it doesn't matter what *your* site 
> says. You're going to get bounces to postmaster because there's no such 
> AOL user or something.

     Well, yes, I understand this at least, but what I was thinking of is 
the fact that I have to weed out our genuine customers emails. So a change 
of email address would at least be more manageable.


>
>> I think I've got about 75% of them pointing to the DI folder now, so it's 
>> not a massive problem.
>
> If you can afford the bandwidth, it's not really a problem if you can get 
> them tossed out reliably.
>
> Generally, bounces delivered to "postmaster" don't need to be looked at 
> unless one of your users asks why it's bouncing after they threw out the 
> bounce message *they* received. (Or unless of course it's bouncing because 
> you're testing the configuration that isn't working right yet, for 
> example.) It's more a "courtesy cc" of the bounce message than anything.
>
> Me, I'd throw away anything coming into postmaster until it calms down. 
> Nowadays, the postmaster address is useless exactly because of this sort 
> of problem.

     Ok, thanks for that Darren, reassuring. The whole thing seems to be 
calming down at the moment, (there seems to be fewer), but I'm now at 3410. 
I wonder what will show in the morning?

      Thanks for the info and advice.

      ~Steve~


>
> -- 
>   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
>     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
>          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
>     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
>      Well, yes, I understand this at least, but what I was thinking of is 
> the fact that I have to weed out our genuine customers emails. So a change 
> of email address would at least be more manageable.

If you have normal customer emails coming to your postmaster address, 
you're probably doing something wrong even if you *are* an ISP. If 
you're not an ISP (and you're just a domain name owner), you shouldn't 
be getting messages to postmaster at all.

Basically, postmaster is for ISPs to talk to other ISPs.  As described 
in the email standards, it was originally the only email address that 
had to go to a real person. Nowadays, it's spam bait.

(It boggles my mind that people actually engage in referrer-spam, 
putting Viagra ads in the user-agent string and then reading bunches of 
web sites so curious web site operators will see the ads.)

>       Thanks for the info and advice.

Sure thing.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> (It boggles my mind that people actually engage in referrer-spam,
> putting Viagra ads in the user-agent string and then reading bunches of
> web sites so curious web site operators will see the ads.)

That's not what they do it for. Some websites (particularly blogs) have a
dynamically-updating list of referrers ("these are the websites that linked
us!"), referrer spam tries to get there.

Post a reply to this message

Well, it stopped about midnight last night at just under 4000. Thankfully, 
nothing this morning!  :o)

   ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
> Well, it stopped about midnight last night at just under 4000. Thankfully, 
> nothing this morning!  :o)
> 
>    ~Steve~
> 
> 
> 
Wot? _Only_ 4000? A long way from the record, methinks. ;-)
I wonder what the record really is?

John

-- 
I will be brief but not nearly so brief as Salvador Dali, who gave the
world's shortest speech. He said, "I will be so brief I am already
finished," then he sat down.

Post a reply to this message

Doctor John wrote:

> I wonder what the record really is?

Given that an ISP running a large server can probably handle thousands 
of emails *per second*, I'd guess it's pretty large. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
> Wow! Anyone else just get bombed with a stack of those 'postmaster' type 
> emails?? See attached. This happened about a week go too when I had over a 
> 1000 in the space of a few hours.  :o(

I'm not getting that many, but in the last few weeks I *suddenly* 
started getting 5 or so spam and/or bounced spam messages per day. WHAT 
CHANGED??

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message