Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 20:44:56 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: jkh@zippy.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: jshafer@triton.net, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, jmb@hub.freebsd.org, postmaster@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Spam blocking (was Re: Book - "Pulpit Confessions: Exposing The Black Church") Message-ID: <199904232044.NAA28855@usr07.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <50957.924834153@zippy.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Apr 22, 99 07:22:33 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I generally contact the site in question and, unless they reply to me > saying "we're taking care of it", the whole domain is blocked. If > they bounce mail sent to abuse@domain or postmaster@domain I also > block them since any ISP who doesn't care enough to have a workable > way of contacting them to report problems also probably doesn't care > about spam and certainly hasn't given me any way to reasonably contact > them. FWIW, RFC-1123 states: | 5.2.7 RCPT Command: RFC-821 Section 4.1.1 | | A host that supports a receiver-SMTP MUST support the reserved | mailbox "Postmaster". So any machine that fails, bounces, or autoresponds to "postmaster" messages is in violation (an autoresponder is a "maildrop", not a "mailbox"). The "abuse" mailbox, however, is not required. RFC-2142 (MAILBOX NAMES FOR COMMON SERVICES, ROLES AND FUNCTIONS) only specifies that it is a current de-feacto standard, and that for that area and usage, if a mailbox exists, that it must be named "abuse". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199904232044.NAA28855>