In <[email protected]>, on 12/29/2011
at 01:38 PM, Alessandro Vesely <[email protected]> said:
>* Neither the RFC nor the draft mention degrading the offending IP's
> profile at the firewall.
I assume that you mean RFC 6449 and not RFC 5965.
>* The RFC says replying to feedback is useless.
I don't see that, although I do see "not necessary".
> The obvious correction for an acknowledged policy contravention
> is to remove the email address of the original recipient from
> whatever storage it was retrieved from for sending the reported
> message, including mailing lists.
I would say that the obvious for an acknowledged policy contravention
is to remove all email address that contravene the policy, not just
the one in the ARF report. Failing to do so could lead to blocking of
the sending IP or IP block.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2 <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
