LarrySheldon at cox.net
Sat Feb 20 11:28:13 CST 2010
On 2/20/2010 10:36 AM, William Herrin wrote:
> They didn't exactly fix it. What they did is reinforce the importance
> of generating a bounce message by keeping the existing "must" language
> from 2821 but adding:
> "A server MAY attempt to verify the return path before using its
> address for delivery notifications"
So, if you don't mind having your realm being blocked to stop the spam
("unsolicited bulk email") it emits, bounce away.
And feel very pompous and correct while you are at it.
In my day, the focus was on what my customers needed and wanted and that
included the elimination of unsolicited email (they were not even big on
the "bulk" qualifier).
As long as the spammers and others that love the bounce are part of the
RFC process, it isn't going to get better.
We don't send email over facilities consisting of cables as big as your
wrist--the world has changed.
We don't expose our selves with "finger" and .plan and a number of other
things that work in a world of friends and neighbors--the world has changed
We don't send notifications and such which depend on people being honest
and trust-worthy--the world has changed.
RFCs describe protocols that, if followed, will allow the described
interoperability. If you don't do everything listed, some stuff won't
work as described. But it isn't Holy Writ. If you don't do something
you don't need (or nobody you care about needs) you won't burn. And
some people may thank you and allow you to be part of their community.
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to
take everything you have."
Remember: The Ark was built by amateurs, the Titanic by professionals.
Requiescas in pace o email
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
Eppure si rinfresca
ICBM Targeting Information: http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
More information about the NANOG