Re: RBL - Back to basics
On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 10:34:09AM +1000, Glenn Hocking wrote:
> However from a 'email service provider' point of view (as per my
> original email) I do not wish to block ANY legitimate email. The more
> spam that is bounced the better BUT my requirement is purely 'If it
> blocks legitimate email, the rbl is useless'.
in that case, you can't use ANY dnsrbl service. nor can you use any
anti-spam methods.
every RBL and every anti-spam method results in some false positives.
it's up to you to decide what level is acceptable for your needs. if
you decide that is zero, then don't make any attempt at spam blocking.
it's your system, your policy. implement whatever you feel is right.
> Most of the other posts to this forum seem to indicate that a lot of
> ISPs are using both conservative and aggressive anti spam lists. Can a
> few of you forward any experiences you have had dealing with customers
> (corporate and individual) who have had legitimate email bounced and
> what remedies you have had to implement to keep you customers happy.
use a decent MTA like postfix which allows you to override RBLs and
other rules for specific recipients. e.g. i have a "spamlovers" map,
/etc/postfix/spamlovers.db, where i list usernames and/or domain names
who have requested that their mail not be filtered. this overrides all
anti-spam rules for those users/domains except for body_checks and
header_checks (at this point in time, there is no way to disable those
on a per-recipient basis...that will change in a future version of
postfix).
craig
--
craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>
Fabricati Diem, PVNC.
-- motto of the Ankh-Morpork City Watch
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: