On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 5:13 AM, Daniel Zaugg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > John Rudd wrote: > > > >> the error is ignored since it has no practical consequence (except > >> maybe in some unread log file) > > > > Unread/unchecked only by half-assed postmasters who aren't worth their > > salt, and should thus be fired. > > > > > > A decent postmaster at least generates summaries of traffic ... > > > > > A postmaster who doesn't check their logs in any fashion deserves > > whatever they get. > > > > > Clearly, only half-baked providers do the latter. > > > > Wow ! Aren't you guys proud to be postmasters ! > > For me being a postmaster clearly is a chore (one of many) to wich I devote > an absolute minimum amount of my precious time. > BTW firing me is not an option since I'm the CEO of my own (small) private > owned company :-) > > Expecting all postmaster to be highly skilled professionals who have studied > all the ins an outs of their system is in my view an unrealistic approach of > a world where almost every company has to have an email server. > I gladly accept all the qualifications you made about being "half baked" > "not decent" etc.. > > Is there somewhere a list of all the still working RBL's or an easy way for > an unskilled neophyt like me to check if an RBL is still valid?
Google should give you pointers to RBL information. RBLs, like many spam fighting tools, are not a "set it and forget it" type of thing. A properly working mail server (very little spam, practically no false positives, good uptime, etc) is not a trivial task. Spam is a moving target. Your config may need frequent adjustment and a close eye on the logs to keeps things working well. Since you're not interested in committing time to this task, why not use one of the many services that can do this work for you? They are generally inexpensive and easy to use. -Aaron
