On 12/Jul/11 15:50, John Levine wrote: > Assuming you remember what reports you've sent, which I can assure you > is a good idea, rate limiting requires one line of SQL.
I agree smart logging is a good idea, but having, say, OpenDBX and a supported database as extra-requirements for a compliant reporter possibly is not so good. >> Yes, such limit makes much sense, either as a global maximum or as a >> per-domain one. Shouldn't it be set by the reporter, though? > > Well, I rate limit my reports, but I thought the topic under discussion > was a way for report recipients to say how many reports they want. Correct. The drafts don't even say whether reporters MAY or SHOULD send reports. IMHO, suggesting best ways to limit them could be covered, in particular for reporters wishing to limit globally rather than per domain. BTW, I like that Scott removed the need for an out-of-band agreement before starting to send spf-failure reports. _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
