On May 15, 2009, at 11:44 PM, Brad Knowles wrote: > on 5/15/09 6:59 PM, Derek J. Balling said: > >> http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/ > > ... many in the anti-spam community ...
This is, perhaps, the fundamental logic-flaw (and one we encounter daily, so you're not unique). RFCI isn't about "stopping spam". You won't even find the word spam anywhere on the web site. We simply don't care if it's an effective "spam measure" or not. RFCI is about standards-compliance. It's about those practices and rules which make the world capable of interoperability, and trying to make the world a slightly better place, one mail server at a time. The SpamAssassin folks HAVE noticed a correlation between "standards- compliance" and "spammyness" ... for some zones it's more direct than others. We never directly encouraged them to use it in their testing criteria though. > If you're doing this for your own domain, that's one thing. When > you're > running a mail server for someone else, or a community of people, > that's > something else. I can think of several large communities (ginormous college campuses, for example) who use our services and do so for the same reason we started it (e.g., "we don't want to accept your mail if you won't accept our bounces with null-envelopes"). Like any form of mail- blocking, it's something you need to completely understand what you're doing before you do it, and have buy-in from management, etc., etc. But standards-compliance is important to a lot of people, and there's enough people who want to enforce it, that we've been able to stick around long after this grew too big to run on a DSL line from my apartment. ;-) Cheers, D _______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [email protected] http://lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
