They will procrastinate until the end of time unless we do something. I tried hard, but they are lazy/ignorant/careless. Blacklisting would trigger a problem with most of their customers, then they will try to de-list at first, then they will comply when de-listing is rejected.
-------- Original Message -------- On 2 Aug 2020, 12:30, Matus UHLAR - fantomas < uh...@fantomas.sk> wrote: On 02.08.20 05:11, Rupert Gallagher wrote: >Correction: it is not the mid, it is the helo. oh... this is something quite different. But unless multiple servers start implementing reject_unknown_helo_hostname, such companies ignore to change that... ... apparently with possibly reject_non_fqdn_elo_hostname and reject_invalid_helo_hostname. and smtpd_helo_required=yes of course >-------- Original Message -------- >On 1 Aug 2020, 14:58, Rupert Gallagher < r...@protonmail.com> wrote: >Two well known companies in my country persist in making the mistake of >writing their mid with a non-public fqdn, violating the rfc. It has been so >for the past three years, with me sending detailed, manually written error >messages to their painstakingly collected admin addresses. Their answer is >that everybody else accepts their invalid mid, and their servers are >enterprise ibm / microsoft shitware that they are unwilling to fix. Since we >get a lot of their emails, I decided to scale up their problem. There are many >blacklists, and I have no intention to go through each idiosyncratic procedure. > >Is there an ombusdman that superintends the major blacklists and enforces rfc >compliance through them? -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Spam = (S)tupid (P)eople's (A)dvertising (M)ethod
