On 2025-05-05 15:56, Nick Schafer via mailop wrote:
Just to follow up on this thread. We are actively working on abuse
reports as they come into our abuse desk each and every day.
Following up: same abuse still active a week later. This time with my
block. Log excerpt:
May 7 15:02:36 mx postfix/smtp/smtpd[32190]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
a24.a38b9138.use4.send.mailgun.net[198.244.53.24]: 554 5.7.1
<a24.a38b9138.use4.send.mailgun.net[198.244.53.24]>: Client host
rejected: only for recipient-approved transactional emails.
a24.a38b9138.use4.send.mailgun.net move on.;
On 2025-05-05 00:46, Michael Rathbun via mailop wrote:
>> What is an "appropriate message?" silently dropping is a message too.
>
> "530 4.7.0 Connection refused" does the job for me.
How is 530 different from 554? and more specifically, is there a message
that will convey to PHB that their belief that their message is more
important than recipient's choice is simply wrong?
The old saying is don't shoot the messenger, but if the Dilberts at ESPs
aid and abet, they deserve the recipient's wrath. Next would be a
drastic firewall rule?
On 2025-05-05 10:45, Peter Corlett via mailop wrote:
> You're an externality,
> not their paying customer, so they don't want to hear from you.
This is the core of the problem indeed. Externalities need to be
internalized for the system to work (again). There has to be a cost to
the pollution, because the pollution is worsening. And not by blue-pill
peddling scammers, phishers, or other lowlies, the problem is with
"legitimate" senders. And with condescending ESPs:
On 2025-05-05 09:32, John A via mailop wrote:
> I feel like in most cases this is something enabled by default that
you can disable when making your reservation.
Bait ignored.
There was another good thread on spam/ham this week on the list.
--
Yuval Levy, Ontario-licensed lawyer
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
