Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Block spam, become removed from the list ... | Date | Wed, 7 Apr 1999 14:34:18 +0300 (EEST) | From | Matti Aarnio <> |
| |
The subject sounds radical ? So it is intended.. Read with a thought. (Perhaps this should be put into FAQs of the list too ?)
> Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 11:21:49 +0100 (GMT) > From: Riley Williams <rhw@BigFoot.Com> > To: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu> > Subject: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender (fwd) > > Hi all. > > The message referred to is one I posted to this mailing list from the > person stated. Since I clearly can't get through to him/her any other > way, I'm forced to post on here to register my disapproval as I'm no > spam merchant and strongly dislike being classified as such.
Yeah, that is a (misguided) case of "ban that domain because its used in so many spams.."
I have contemplated doing exactly that for AOL at VGER, but VGER does have a few lists where AOL users are in great abundance... Can't do it :-/
Oh yes, often when list-owners get that type of rejections, our reaction is simple: Remove the recipient which yields the rejection report. (in fact, remove any recipient which yields any rejection, including any recipient which yields delivery timeout...)
Sure that reaction may sound stupid to you at first, but consider that each of us must somehow process something like 200 to 2000 rejection reports every day thru all the year, and we do all that at our spare time.
Unfortunately we postmasters/list-owners don't have the luxury of time to educate people of the nyances of email systems; when to blame some system, and when *not* to blame. That last one can be a difficult question to answer without 5+ years of email systems and protocols experience...
So, if you folks want to filter incoming email against some source addresses carrying SPAM, be damn carefull that you don't filter too much. Letting *some* spam thru is way better than killing all your incoming email.
Filtering the email by delivering it to /dev/null is also better approach, than rejecting it at the input phase. Sure the byte- counters spin, but that isn't so bad as becoming removed because of over-eager pre-reception blocking based on false rules.
... > Best wishes from Riley.
/Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio@sonera.fi> <mea@vger.rutgers.edu> One of the supporting postmasters of VGER's lists
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |