Re: Which Spam Block List to use for a network?
You mean http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mengwong-spf-01.txt.
Very nice idea to perhaps avoid some percent of spam. The only problem:
It has nothing to do with the reality out in the world and net respectively.
It's only shifting the job of blacklisting ip's to domains.
Sit back a while and try to think about a realistic number
of email addresses/domains today ...
... and you will forget any kind of such academic solution.
I'm getting some hundreds of spams every day - all flavor of spam, really!
And I know some customers of the compnay I'm working for with nearly
the same amount.
Now my answer is a combination of a couple of tools integrated into the
mailer daemon we're using today and a weighting scheme of all at the end:
Today I'm dealing with about 0,1 % false positives/negatives.
So I would say the answer to all methods should be some reasonable regular
updated mixture of them.
It's a war not a problem!
And I think if somebody is tryning to write some RFC for that
the same would be obsolete before he's able publish it.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yves Junqueira" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: <email@example.com>; "Craig Sanders" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 5:05 PM
Subject: Re: Which Spam Block List to use for a network?
> SPF is a proposed standard.
> Even Microsoft seemed to drops its CallerID proposal in favor of SPF.
> Check spf.pobox.com
> On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 11:45:40 +0200, Niccolo Rigacci <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Please correct me if I'm wrong; I'm searching for RFCs which
> > propose effective ways to block spam and viruses.
> Yves Junqueira
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org