Re: greylisting on debian.org?
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Another way to avoid problems with clusters is to assume certain common
> setup patterns for server farms, like a cheap netmask match. This does, in
> a way, "require you to know in advance the setup of remote networks", in the
> sense that you need to know the common patterns that will be used. At
> least now you are dealing with patterns, and not specific instances.
This is not adequate, sorry, at least, not in my book.
I am concerned that you not use a spam-defeating technique which
blocks perfectly legitimate and standards-compliant email.
What I object to is specifically the attempt to create *new*
standards, by blocking legitimate email. There is no standard
requirement that a server farm use a small netmask or one of a set of
common patterns. If you want such a requirement, please propose one
to the IETF. You know how.
Saying "if everyone followed rule X (and heck, lots of people already
do!) my system would work perfectly" is irrelevant to me. What
matters to me is "my scheme works when everyone follows the actual
public standards for email."