Re: Comment - GFI/SORBS

2010-12-15 Thread Nigel Frankcom
This is a long and somewhat complex story. I've been running my own mail for 15+ years or so, always on a fixed IP. A few years ago business picked up so I got some additional IP's from my supplier (BT); it turned out that they were decommissioned DUL's renewed as statics. Initially we jumped the

Re: Comment - GFI/SORBS

2010-12-15 Thread Nigel Frankcom
On Wed, 15 Dec 2010 07:04:18 +, corpus.defero corpus.def...@idnet.com wrote: Ultimately, this seems to be more of a witch hunt against SORBS than a SA issue. Although I'm not opposed to a SORBS witch hunt, I don't think it belongs here. Indeed, and it's Lynford and his money grabbing

Comment - GFI/SORBS

2010-12-14 Thread Nigel Frankcom
Hi All, Is sorbs going to be continued as a scoring option in SA? Having hit yet more problems with them I've zeroed their scoring. I found this a couple of days ago, maybe it can add weight. http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2010/12/gfi-sorbs-considered-harmful/ Best to all Nigel

Re: Comment - GFI/SORBS

2010-12-14 Thread corpus.defero
On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 16:58 +, Nigel Frankcom wrote: Hi All, Is sorbs going to be continued as a scoring option in SA? Having hit yet more problems with them I've zeroed their scoring. ... I hope so. I find SORBS wonderful in dealing with those troublesome mailers that have managed to

Re: Comment - GFI/SORBS

2010-12-14 Thread Bart Schaefer
http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2010/12/gfi-sorbs-considered-harmful-part-5/

Re: Comment - GFI/SORBS

2010-12-14 Thread Jason Bertoch
On 12/14/2010 8:06 PM, Bart Schaefer wrote: http://blog.wordtothewise.com/2010/12/gfi-sorbs-considered-harmful-part-5/ I've seen the headaches of getting off SORBS, but how did you really end up there? While I agree that SORBS is not reliable enough for use at the MTA level, I've not seen

Re: Comment - GFI/SORBS

2010-12-14 Thread corpus.defero
Ultimately, this seems to be more of a witch hunt against SORBS than a SA issue. Although I'm not opposed to a SORBS witch hunt, I don't think it belongs here. Indeed, and it's Lynford and his money grabbing cronies mostly behind it - hence it lacks sophistication.