At 9:02 PM -0700 11/30/2005, Ben Parker wrote: >Sorry for the delay in my response to this. I've been on medical leave >(technically I still am) following surgery last week (Nov 22 in fact!)
Thanx for the reply, hope you are well on your road to recovery >On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 10:30:03 -0500, KMF-MIS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>The list seems to have made it into the spamcop database >><http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=blcheck&ip=209.119.0.21> > >No, one of our several primary outbound mail server IP addresses has made it >into automated spamcop database. > >>This is not the first time the list has made it into a DNSBL. IIRC the last >>time was also for sending to spamtrap addresses. Is there a problem with the >>list that allows spamtrap addresses to get subscribed? > >No, such addresses are subscribed to any list at L-Soft. However there are >several circumstances where legitmate email sent by any of our servers may >(unbeknownst to us) go to spamtrap addresses. Since we cannot know in >advance what these spamtrap addresses are, we cannot block/prevent such >legitmate emails from being sent. > >For a longer discusssion of the problems see: > ><http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0511&L=EASE-HOME&P=R1076> > >and about 30 further following emails in a thread starting here: > ><http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0511&L=EASE-HOME&P=R1908> Thanx for the clear explanation of what is happening >The real problem is that Spamcop listing is automatic on any email of any >kind arriving at their spamtrap address, even though L-Soft is caught >between the proverbial rock and hard place. Without debating the >merits/demerits of Spamcop's approach (which is a subject for SPAM-L and >other similar lists, but not the WIN-HOME list) this fact is poorly >understood by ISP's that blindly use Spamcop's (or any other) RBL services >and think they are "fully protected". > >Any subscriber to this list whose ISP uses Spamcop (and as a result gets >auto-deleted from the list) should complain to their ISP about "false >positive" blockage of legitmate and desired email by blindly using Spamcop's >services without being aware of its limitations or possible gaps in its >level of reliability. If you are not happy with the service you receive >from your ISP, you should let them know. Perhaps they will let Spamcop know >and Spamcop may (or may not) provide some alternative. Letting spam cop know is indeed a good idea. It might also help (at least the subscribers) if the list bounce processor was a little smarter. The reason currently given in the e-mail for unsubbing a subscriber when spam cop is in play is incorrect, if the bounce processor looked at the enhanced status code (RFC 1893) in the bounce message and unsubbed 5.1.1 but not 5.7.1 this would allow time for the least to get off spam cop or for the subscriber to white list the particular mail server being listed. Plan B might be for the bounce processor to not unsub people if the bounces to a particular address have stopped. I have bounced list messages with a spam cop filter, white listed the server and started receiving messages again and then been unsubbed one or more days later even tho I was no longer bouncing list messages. Thanx again for your reply and hopefully you will give some thought to making the bounce processing and/or unsub processing a little smarter. _____________________________________________________________ MIS Department Kubota Metal Corporation (705) 325-2781 x322 25 Commerce Road Fax (705) 325-5887 Orillia, Ontario L3V 6L6 Web <http://www.kubotametal.com> -- ---------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is your picture included in the Official Win-Home List Members Profiles Page? http://www.besteffort.com/winhome/Profiles.html If not, write to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
