[ih] more bounce management, was update about bogus list unsubcribe requests

[johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)]

>It's not just bandwidth.  It's also a matter of CPU cycles - at both 
>ends (particularly when you factor in antivirus and antispam processing).

Having actually done this, I'd say that it's a rather unusual mail
system if the extra processing to handle multiple copies of a message
poses a problem.  Have you tried measuring it?

> The only way to deal with that is to send each 
>recipient their own message, then go through and match message id's in 
>the log file.  What a waste.

Please see previous message.  Really, it's not 1996 any more, the
extra bandwidth and processing for individual deliveries are trivial
on today's Internet.

Also, if figuring out redacted bounces is a problem, nobody will
redact an x-fooble header with a base64 version of the recipient
address.  People at the mail systems that do the redaction have
assured me it's purely to satisfy some odd lawyer privacy theory, the
lawyers only care about plain text versions of addresses, they know
it's trivially easy to encode the recipient in another header, and
that's just dandy with them.  That's the sort of thing I'll hack into
Sympa if I ever have time.

R's,
John