On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 02:45:13 +0100 mouss <mo...@ml.netoyen.net> articulated:
> Le 19/11/2010 22:22, Jeroen Geilman a écrit : > > On 11/18/2010 03:11 PM, Jerry wrote: > >> To a point I would agree with you. I have often wondered what moron > >> came up with certain "standards" that are now in effect. > > > > > > That would be the morons without whom you would not HAVE internet. > > > > Get a clue, please. > > > > I think you misread Jerry's post. his first statement is > "unfortunate" because it encourages ignoring the rest. but his last > statement says: > > "Ignoring its existence, at least in my opinion, is not a viable > option." Thank you mouss. I probably could have worded my response better; however, I did feel it was obvious what the intent was. In any case, this is an example of what I consider to be over thinking a problem. <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5965> Personally, I have been a life long suporter of the "KISS" principal. This RFC seems to only overly complicate the issue. I read somewhere that supposedly on 12/01/2010, <ab...@yahoo.com> will only be accepting reports in this form. Considering that they don't do much with reports in any form to begin with, when added to the very real possibility that they will not be receiving reports in rfc5965 format any time soon, I believe I can safely state that the Yahoo abuse staff will have a very carefree/work free holiday season. Then again, that is just my 2¢. Feel free to object. -- Jerry ✌ postfix-u...@seibercom.net _____________________________________________________________________ TO REPORT A PROBLEM see http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#mail TO (UN)SUBSCRIBE see http://www.postfix.org/lists.html
