Re: NEVER USE SORBS
--On July 27, 2006 12:51:01 PM +1000 Craig Sanders <email@example.com> wrote:
i wouldn't ever use spamcop - their automation is broken to the point
of being moronic. i've seen way too many legitimate mailing lists end
up blocked by them because some idiot (who *DID* subscribe in the first
place) is too lazy to read & follow the how-to-unsub instructions at the
bottom of each message.
AOL's is *FAR* worse. AOL still backscatters and can't tell the difference
between email it's users require us to forward and junk. We do everything
we can to junk junk mail before we forward to our (misguided customers)
with offsite forwarding to AOL, but we still get blocked by them despite
'being on their whitelist'. 99% of the scomp feedback from them is users
who just don't get it.
SCs metrics have always been more reliable for us than other methods, we do
only use it for a 4xx response from our mailservers though. Legit mail
retries. If you're sending us enough mail that we're causing you a queuing
problem then it's likely there's something amiss somewhere. *shrugs*
never heard of bl.ursine.ca. if it has DUL entries that SORBS doesn't,
it might be worth checking out but i dont see any point using a DUL that
has less than SORBS (IMO, it is woefully incomplete - there are a lot
more dynamic addresses which should be listed but aren't yet).
It' just be better if ISPs would willingly block or redirect outbound mail
from their zombie pools. Not like it's difficult, every piece of gear out
there has the required hardware to do it.