> On May 18, 2026, at 9:44 AM, Andrew C Aitchison via mailop > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, 18 May 2026, Alessandro Vesely via mailop wrote: > >> On 18/05/2026 08:51, Andrew C Aitchison wrote: >>> Has anyone tried the StaleMARC RBL >>> https://measurement.network/services/stalemarc-rua-ruf-rbl/ >> >> >> Cute! >> >> They're called RBL, but they actually work via web queries. >> >>> I get probed by them once a fortnight ? >> >> How do recognize their probing?
Okay, this might be off-topic for mailop (once I resurrect some mailing lists, those will be the place, but that's hopefully later this week). The person with the abillity to make DNS changes is somewhat oversubscribed at the moment. ...but with the work I'm doing, right now, RUA reports in OpenDMARC are sent via a perl script, but RUF reports are sent directly from the C milter by popen() ing a pipe to sendmail. It's sounding more and more like I need to break RUF= reporting also into an off-board script, so it can inherit from all of this. And do VERP so that a future tool can back off sends the same way many listservs do. And perhaps customize the body text more easily. Also, http and https urls are valid url-methods for RUA/RUF, and the milter doesn't do them. The perl script now does, in my branch, and they don't suffer the bounce issue, although they don't seem to be in wide use. I'm also thinking just a manually maintained list of "dead report receivers" is useful. I'll also contact the measurement.network people and perhaps see if they need help putting the stalemark stuff into an actual RBL, or if they'd have a problem with our docs pointing at them. Otherwise, I apologize for the noise. I was wrong about the pipelining thing causing the 45X/5XX errors in the same transaction, I sort of missed that feature in seeing all the *other* youre-a-big-huge-company-you-should-know-better dysfunction in that transaction. -Dan _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
