nanog mailing list archives
Re: AOL 421 errors
From: Matt Ghali <matt () snark net>
Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 10:47:28 -0700 (PDT)
On Wed, 3 May 2006, Joe Maimon wrote:
<COUNTER-RANT>You know, people say things like this a lot. Its not relevant. What is relevant is how AOL is supposed to know thata) the email considered for rejection is actually wanted b) and wanted by AOL employees themselvesAnd if they did know how to accurately determine that, we wouldnt be having this discussion.
The irony here of course, is that Matt Black's systems can't even tell if they want the mail until _after_ the accept it- but that's a feature, and AOL's in-transaction softfails are evil. Or something.
matto --matt () snark net------------------------------------------<darwin>< Moral indignation is a technique to endow the idiot with dignity. - Marshall McLuhan
Current thread:
- AOL 421 errors Matthew Black (May 03)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Jim Popovitch (May 03)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Joe Maimon (May 03)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Derek J. Balling (May 03)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Simon Waters (May 04)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Suresh Ramasubramanian (May 04)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Joseph S D Yao (May 05)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Erik Radius (May 05)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Joseph S D Yao (May 05)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Joe Maimon (May 03)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Jim Popovitch (May 03)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Matt Ghali (May 04)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Matthew Black (May 04)
- Re: AOL 421 errors Jim Popovitch (May 04)
- Re: AOL 421 errors (and 554 errors too) Joseph W. Breu (May 04)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: AOL 421 errors David Hubbard (May 03)