Re: Which Spam Block List to use for a network?

To: debian-isp@lists.debian.org, debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Which Spam Block List to use for a network?
From: Adam Funk <a24061@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 08:04:15 GMT
Message-id: <[🔎] 3sSAc.4702$TJ4.41572553@news-text.cableinet.net>
References: <[🔎] 20040618142958.GA19680@let.rug.nl> <[🔎] 200406191646.31139.russell@coker.com.au>

On Saturday 19 June 2004 07:50, Russell Coker wrote:

> By far the most false-positive entries I have had are from
> postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org and abuse.rfc-ignorant.org.  The

That's because rfc-ignorant.org's lists aren't about spamming.  They are
about domains that fail to conform to certain RFCs.  (Although I
disagree with their listing of *.uk on the grounds that the UK registry
allows people to withhold their private contact details from whois.)

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Which Spam Block List to use for a network?
  - From: Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au>

References:
- Which Spam Block List to use for a network?
  - From: Francisco Borges <frandebo@latt.if.usp.br>
- Re: Which Spam Block List to use for a network?
  - From: Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au>

Prev by Date: Re: Which Spam Block List to use for a network?
Next by Date: Re: Which Spam Block List to use for a network?
Previous by thread: Re: Which Spam Block List to use for a network?
Next by thread: Re: Which Spam Block List to use for a network?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread