http://blogs.msdn.com/tzink/archive/2008/07/16/the-problem-of-backscatter-part-12-don-t-make-the-problem-worse-by-contributing-to-it.aspxMany of the web sites that discuss backscatter encourage mail administrators to not further contribute to the problem of backscatter.&#160; I would be remiss if I did not include a section on it. Don't accept mail, and then bounce. &#160; The primaryenCommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)http://blogs.msdn.com/tzink/archive/2008/07/16/the-problem-of-backscatter-part-12-don-t-make-the-problem-worse-by-contributing-to-it.aspx#8743758Thu, 17 Jul 2008 16:04:32 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:8743758Lee Maguire<p>&quot;You might be able to get away with not setting anything for senders outside of your org.&quot;</p> <p>In my experience, it's the opposite. &nbsp;Awareness of vacation time can be made available via other methods (FREE/BUSY, internal company calendaring, etc). &nbsp;It's untimely customer/client communication that companies are trying to avoid with out-of-office messages. &nbsp;And those companies would need a very compelling business case for turning the feature off.</p> http://blogs.msdn.com/tzink/archive/2008/07/16/the-problem-of-backscatter-part-12-don-t-make-the-problem-worse-by-contributing-to-it.aspx#8747248Fri, 18 Jul 2008 09:48:17 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:8747248Frank<p>C/R, vacation, and similar pains are easy to handle. If receivers decide to use them anyway they MUST follow RFC 3834 and maybe 5230 (for SIEVE), i.e. send their crap to the envelope sender address. That avoids issues with mailing lists (=&gt; deactivation or forced unsubscription, but no SpamCop report). If those users are no hopeless cases they could limit their &quot;efforts&quot; to white listed (= known) addresses and/or SPF PASS.</p> <p>Another way to reduce backscatter at the border could be &quot;MINGER&quot; specified in an Internet Draft: Roughly a very cheap way for border MTAs to figure out which mailboxes exist and are ready (anything else can be directly rejected at the border, instead of bouncing it later causing backscatter). </p> http://blogs.msdn.com/tzink/archive/2008/07/16/the-problem-of-backscatter-part-12-don-t-make-the-problem-worse-by-contributing-to-it.aspx#8750357Fri, 18 Jul 2008 20:30:24 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:8750357Terry Zink's Anti-spam Blog<p>Around the internet world, specifically dealing with email and MTAs, there are people who are familiar</p>