On 15/06/2016 16:08, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
On 15-Jun-2016, at 11:33 AM, Noel Butler <noel.but...@ausics.net>
wrote:
Its not just DNSBL's as has been pointed out by people other than
myself who use similar rules locally, the safest bet is to accept this
is how the world works in many places, and slightly changing the DNS
should resolve all the problems, in fact, now it has been explained by
several people in many different ways I hope the OP has understood
(yes I accept language barriers can be problematic) and has already
begun changing their A/PTRs to something that is less eye catching to
remote sites.
One thing I learnt is that there’s a wide variety of sites operating
weird and wonderful filters of one sort or the other.
Oh. you are so right there :)
Unless it is a common best practice AND a practice widely implemented
including by the larger receivers, it is absolutely no use bending
over backwards to, for example, change perfectly valid PTR records to
suit the tastes of a very few individual receivers with an
infinitesimal number of mailboxes.
As I recently said, there is a reason Google and others use the method
they do, one of them would be to avoid situations just like this. It
would be best written as a SHOULD in smtp RFC for using non end user
looking A/PTRs, that would be a "best practice", remember silently
discarding spam has been done for decades before it made its way into
RFC's.
--
If you have the urge to reply to all rather than reply to list, you best
first read http://members.ausics.net/qwerty/
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
