>I am not asking for a referral to some other email service provider.

> >

>

>Perhaps you should be. The problem is your service provider is using an

>arcane methodology and, as most service providers are supplying gigabytes

>for free as part of their service, perhaps it's time you reconsidered your

>mail system design. At the very least, a stern discussion with them to see

>if they can prevent their self-caused outages.

>

>

> > I am trying to understand what the options are for sender verify and why

> > people use them.

> >

>

>As explained in the Wikipedia article, they're trying to verify that mail

>actually came from a real mailbox and not a made up fake spam one. However,

>I have a hard time understanding how this is filling up a mailbox until the

>storage capacity is pitifully low.

>

>POP is not designed to retain mail on the server. The "retain for x days"

>functionality was an after-thought and the implications not fully

>understood. It would probably make more sense to retain email in-house or

>with another server. You could put your own mail server in between the

>users and the internet, and retain mail there, but that may just be

>shifting the problem.

Thanks Ted.

Possibly the tech who explained this to me did not fully explain what he

was doing. The "test" emails are not ever actually delivered, so there must

be something further going on; perhaps they contain a code that causes them

to be immediately tossed into the bit bucket. However, if the mailbox is

full when they arrive, they are, naturally, bounced, and any rejection is

then interpreted as "sender verify failed". I would think that at the very

least the thing should be able to read the actual text of the bounce

message and verify the sender if the message contains "over quota", since

such a message indicates that the account exists, but the guy insisted that

this is not possible.

Maintaining the security and functionality of an email server that

communicates with the internet is a headache I don't want or have time for.

(We have an internal email server but that is not a significant security

risk.) I'm a one-man IT department in an agency of nearly 100 computer

users. I barely have time to do what I already have to do. :)

Thanks,

Ken Dibble

www.stic-cil.org

_______________________________________________

Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com

Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox

OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech

Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox

This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/5.2.1.1.1.20130429145507.01c93dd8@POP-Server.stny.rr.com

** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.