Russell Coker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said on Sat, 19 Jun 2004 19:54:55 +1000: > On Sat, 19 Jun 2004 18:04, Adam Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Saturday 19 June 2004 07:50, Russell Coker wrote: > > > By far the most false-positive entries I have had are from > > > postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org and abuse.rfc-ignorant.org. The > > > > That's because rfc-ignorant.org's lists aren't about spamming. They are > > about domains that fail to conform to certain RFCs. (Although I > > disagree with their listing of *.uk on the grounds that the UK registry > > allows people to withhold their private contact details from whois.)
Haven't they always allowed to be fake anyway? Isn't that how spammers get away with spamming in the US? > They also list all of Australia for the same reason as listing the UK. It > seems that whois is not worth much any more. And all of our national monopoly^Wcarrier are in some other blacklists, because they are not so prompt in dealing with spam. Unfortunately, what does every ISP use as an upstream? -- TimC -- http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/staff/tconnors/ Never trust a man who can count to 1,023 on his fingers.
