On Monday 17 July 2006 23:41, Pierre Habouzit took the opportunity to write: > Le lun 17 juillet 2006 19:53, Adrian von Bidder a écrit : > > So the question is, imho, not if we should potentially lock out users > > of big mail pools - those are in the default whitelists anyway by > > now. The question is: can we temporarily (until they can be > > whitelisted) lock out users of "standards?-who-needs-standards?" > > systems that don't implement sensible queueing. Many of these sites > > are small - but there are also a few bigger names: Yahoo groups, > > Amazon, Roche, Motorola. (According to postgrey's default whitelist. > > Some of these are from 2004 or earlier, and AFAIK nobody tries to > > verify if these systems are still stupid in that way.) > > OTOH those systems are not listed on RBL's (or it does not last) and you > won't greylist them.
Which RBL's do you have in mind? I mean, some RBL's, like XBL/SBL, are
high-quality enough that you can outright reject. Others, like SpamCop, are
likely to include some of the bigger names from time to time. DUL lists might
be good candidates.
--
Magnus Holmgren [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(No Cc of list mail needed, thanks)
pgpShTNmCba9F.pgp
Description: PGP signature
