On Mon, Jul 23, 2001 at 03:55:34AM -0400, Jeff Palmer wrote:
> Or you might want to consider RFC compliance.
Since you mentioned it, please reread RFC 2821, section 4.5.1, last
para, cross-referencing RFC 2119 for the definition of "SHOULD".
In the matter under discussion (a grevious spam attack against mail
providers hosting thousands of users), blocking all incoming mail from
a specific IP address does /not/ contravene any RFC I've seen.
It's also a step I don't take lightly. If I block off all mail from
your IP address, instead of simply filtering out the offending stuff or
telling my users to delete it and get on with their lives, it means you
committed a grevious faux pas, intentional or otherwise, against my site
and my users. If I'm not up to my eyeballs in support calls, I might
take the time to craft and apply an appropriate filter. Otherwise,
I slam the door shut and get on with the other stuff.
And as I mentioned, it's not as if I'm cutting off the only means that the
offending site admin can communicate with me, nor does it take a lot of
effort to discover those other channels.
> Of course, everyone has their own opinions. Mine happens to be "comply
> with the standards. Thats what they were written for."
If you can find a standards document anywhere that says unequivocally
that mail to postmaster MUST be accepted under any and all circumstances,
and therefore that my choice of actions is wrong in a "legal" sense,
please let me know where I can find it.
--
Adrian Ho Tinker, Drifter, Fixer, Bum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archived @: <http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=qmail>
Useful URLs: <http://cr.yp.to/qmail.html> <http://www.qmail.org>
<http://www.lifewithqmail.org/> <http://qmail.faqts.com/>
