Re: [Fwd: Re: Spamassasin over RBL, was Re: rblsmtpd -t?]
On Tue, 7 May 2002 18:55, Craig Sanders wrote:
> Dynamic IP address is the criteria.
> seems like a perfectly reasonable assumption to me. in my experience,
> all mail which comes directly from a dynamic IP *IS* spam.
> the tiny handful of hobbyists with their own domains hosted on a dynamic
> IP with linux or freebsd should quit whining and use their ISP's mail
> server. or get themselves a uucp over tcp mail feed. or batched smtp
> over ssh. or similar. frankly, if they're not competent to do any of
> these things then they're not competent enough to be running a mail
> server on the internet.
Findind a suitable server to relay through is not that difficult. Relaying
mail securely through ssh tunnels prevents unauthorised use and only requires
a server with ssh access that accepts [127.0.0.1]25 connections.
On a few occasions after discussions such as this one I have offered an ssh
account on one of my servers for such purposes to one of the people involved
in the dicsussion, but then it always seems to turn out that they don't
REALLY want to solve an email problem, they just want to argue about spam
If you send email to me or to a mailing list that I use which has >4 lines
of legalistic junk at the end then you are specifically authorizing me to do
whatever I wish with the message and all other messages from your domain, by
posting the message you agree that your long legalistic sig is void.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org