Re: Every spam is sacred
Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es> a tapoté :
> > >> A message sent via these bad ISP is a "completely obvious spam"? I
> > >> would be happy to share this simplistic approach.
> >
> > > You are the one being simplistic.
> >
> > How so? An open relay is a configuration that may be conducive
> > to spam, but it does not follow that every message that comes from an
> > open relay is spam.
>
> I called Mathieu simplistic because he was talking in terms of "bad ISPs",
> "good ISPs". I bet that most ISPs do not have their main SMTP servers as
> an open relay, because otherwise they would have serious connectivity
> problems with the rest of the world.
But you are indeed also talking in terms of "bad ISPs" and "good
ISPs", even if you did not write these words.
You are betting that most ISPs are careful about spam issues, what we
can easily call "good ISPs" (term I did not used) or "decent ISPs".
You are proposing to block/tag mails that come from some ISPs, so you
are actually considering these ISP as the bad ones.
I would be simplistic if we were debatting on the different kind of
ISPs that exists on earth and if I were saying that ISP are just good
or bad.
But the topic is mail filtering. And you are the one that simply
(hu!!) consider that any mail sent by a SMTP of a "bad ISP" (according
to the previous definition, which is not the point) is a "completely
obvious spam".
You are maybe right. It means that the DNSBL you want to be installed:
- do not list any ISPs
- got on file some ISPs that refuses customers that aren't
spammers
--
Mathieu Roy
Homepage:
http://yeupou.coleumes.org
Not a native english speaker:
http://stock.coleumes.org/doc.php?i=/misc-files/flawed-english
Reply to: