A lot of sites reject "+" as being a valid character in email addresses.
None I have come across reject "-". Qmail (and Postfix can be configured)
supports user-ext addressing out of the box. These days I just give mailing
lists a @gmail address and let Google handle the spam.

-john

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Derek Balling <[email protected]> wrote:

> Zoinks...
>
> I think that was the miller I'd written to do that for myself and made
> available.
>
> Let me see if I can find it.
>
>
> > On Nov 12, 2014, at 8:32 AM, Craig Constantine <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > I seem to remember a sendmail module that used to auto-create email
> addresses and then turn them off after a configured time period. So you
> configured it that you could make up any email address of a certain
> pattern, like “craig\d+@“ and it would auto-create when a message
> arrived. So you could just invent, on the fly, email addresses “craig12345@“
> and give it to people, use for registrations. Then like a year later, it
> automatically stopped working. (But, I was unable to dig this up.)
> >
> > http://linux.die.net/man/8/milter-regex
> > …might get you there too. Write a rule that says anything like
> “craig2014.*” is acceptable and mapped to “craig”. Then make up email
> addresses all year. Go in and kill the “2013” rule and you shrug off that
> whole year’s junk.
> >
> > --Craig Constantine, http://constantine.name
> >
> >
> > On Nov 12, 2014, at 11:22 AM, Brian Mathis <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > The modern way to do this is by using "plus addressing", which is a
> standard (though not supported by all email hosts) where you tag your
> regular email address like this:
> >    [email protected]
> >
> > The receiving host delivers the message as if the email address is "
> [email protected]", but you can still see the +tag and file it accordingly.
> >
> > It's really inelegant to use a catch-all for this, as you are basically
> polluting a whole domain with all kinds of random email addresses, not to
> mention inviting tons of spam into the account.  It's also annoying for
> people on mailing lists to see addresses like "[email protected]" as an
> email address someone is using, as you have no idea who that address
> actually belongs to.  "[email protected]" makes a lot more sense to
> the people on the list.
> >
> > I know some will argue that if they own a domain they can do what they
> want, and of course that is true, but that doesn't change it being ugly.
> >
> >
> > ❧ Brian Mathis
> > @orev
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (lopser) <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> > So, in the past I used a catch-all address and I would never give out
> the same email address twice.  For example, on this list I am
> [email protected].  At present, nobody supports catch-all addresses,
> so instead I create infinite aliases.  I have around 600-700 alias email
> addresses, and an app on my phone that lets me trivially create new ones on
> the spot.  Just punch in "lopser" and hit the Create button.  30 seconds
> later, done.
> >
> >
> >
> > The most commonly compromised addresses are those I use in mailing
> lists.  In the past, I used to be lopsa, lopsa2, lopsa3, lopsa4, and now
> lopser.  So that's about once per year, maybe every other year.
> >
> >
> >
> > There have been a few surprises over the years - I started receiving
> junk sent to the address I used at box.com.  I tried contacting them to
> notify them they had a breach and their backend databases were being
> leaked, but I didn't get very far, because they actually had so many other
> people contacting them for the same reason, that they wrote a FAQ to tell
> us all to shove off.
> >
> >
> >
> > I just received an email from Home Depot stating that they apologize, a
> leak has occurred, and my email address was compromised.  This is *much*
> much more graceful than Box or Citizens Bank.  While my reaction was to
> immediately cease using Box and Citizens and perpetually smear them at
> every opportunity, my reaction to Home Depot is sympathetic.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
> > http://lopsa.org/
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
> > http://lopsa.org/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> > This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
> > http://lopsa.org/
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
>  http://lopsa.org/
>
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
 http://lopsa.org/

Reply via email to