All sounds nice -- for a personal mail server. Can wish other people would place same low value on junk you describe, but people want some of that stuff. Or even the good ones mixed with flood of marketing junk.
I wondered the decision rationale for Klaus or Hans-Martin blocking those AS if they host mail for more than personal purpose, or anyone other who will make a decision that is so broad as to block full AS. On Tuesday, September 29th, 2026 at 12:30 PM, postfix--- via mailop <[email protected]> wrote: > personal anecdote: some of the brands listed are more spammy than a > clingy ex. > > general rule: just because <ENTITY> had a legit business interaction > with <RECIPIENT>, it does not give <ENTITY> permission to pester > <RECIPIENT>. > > some of those entities have made bad hiring and this is the consequence. > at least for now, most of those entities have kept the sewage stream > separate from the valuable/transactional emails that recipients want. > however, I have observed entities where Pointy-Haired Boss has prevailed > over Dilbert and they have used the same SMTP client to send ham and > spam. No wonder that recipients who can turn vegeterian and these > entities sell less ham than they could if they would behave and stop > PHB's diarrhea. > > My inbox, my rule. some of them: > - don't send me customer surveys. blocked > - don't send me calendar reminders. blocked. > - don't send me subscription renewal reminders. blocked. > - don't send me status updates I have not asked for. blocked. > > or the general rule: opt-in, not opt-out. separately, for each and > every class of new annoying messaging that the PHB of "customer > engagement" can fart, with the default being NO. > > Yuv > > > On 2026-09-29 03:26, ndrs via mailop wrote: > > Any comment to this? > > > > > > On Saturday, September 19th, 2026 at 5:14 AM, ndrs via mailop > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >>>> I have decided to not accept any SMTP connections from the Google cloud > >>>> infrastructure (AS396982). > >>> > >>> I block them completely on my system. There is nothing good inside that > >>> infrastructure. > >>> > >>> Note, that they have two AS assigned tho their cloud infrastructure: > >>> - AS396982 > >>> - AS19527 > >> > >> How can you do that confidently? Some names in that AS that jump out at me > >> include the following list. Have you confidently documented that no good > >> mail comes out of that AS before blocking? Why not block any host > >> identified as googleusercontent.com instead? Do you service a variety of > >> users who want mail from lots of different places? > >> > >> Uber Technologies, INC > >> Cogent Communications > >> Groupon, Inc. > >> Priceline.com > >> Salesforce, Inc > >> FedEx > >> U.S. Dept. of Health And Human Services > >> The Dun & Bradstreet Corporation > >> Palo Alto Networks, INC > >> S&p Global Inc. > >> US U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission > >> Shopify, Inc. > >> The Home Depot Inc. > >> Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation > >> US Chicago Mercantile Exchange > >> Crowdstrike > >> Mailspike > >> Nokia of America Corporation > >> Ericsson Ab > >> Honeywell International Inc. > >> US Johnson & Johnson > >> Calix, Inc. > >> Dow Networks > >> Credit Karma, Inc. > >> Sendinblue > >> Cisco Webex LLC _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
