[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Good Day



On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 03:30:52PM +0100, Tim Haynes wrote:
> 
> Given that rfc-ignorant lists *.uk for not having contact info, would you
> like to refine that to `shite idea'?

That's in the whois.rfc-ignorant.org blacklist.  That's not the list I
was talking about.  And it is not rfc-ignorant's fault that whois.nic.uk
does not list any useful contact information for .uk domains.  I don't
use (and don't recommend) whois.rfc-ignorant.org, because it's not your
fault that whois.nic.uk is completely broken.  But if you don't register
accurate information with whois.ripe.net, then that *is* your fault and
you should get blacklisted.

> > Some of the other blacklists at rfc-ignorant.org are nice as well. The
> > postmaster blacklist contains domains that don't have a working
> > postmaster alias.
> 
> That's more like it, although why penalise the sender because of the
> domain? Not everyone always uses a personal domain for their mail...

How can the domain be trusted to properly handle your mail if they can't
be bothered to adhere to internet standards?  If your ISP won't set up a
working postmaster box, then chances are good that that's merely a sign
of a deeper level of incompetance and you've been frustrated by their
poor service already.  Finding a new ISP, at that point, is a very valid
solution.  I do realize that there are people out there in the
unfortunate situation where there is no alternative ISP to choose from.
That is, in part, why I don't subscribe to postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org.

noah

-- 
 _______________________________________________________
| Web: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/
| PGP Public Key: http://web.morgul.net/~frodo/mail.html 

Attachment: pgpGXZyIsr8IW.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: