Author: Alan J. Flavell Date: To: exim-list Subject: Re: [exim] Please help with getting out of RBL hell
On Sat, 3 Dec 2005, Matthew Byng-Maddick reminds us that:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 11:25:08PM -0800, Tony Godshall wrote: [...] > > Sorry to say this, but you sound like one of those cops in
> > the suburban white neighborhood who blocked, with shotguns,
> > the refugees fleeing New Orleans with shotguns. It's not a
> > big step from your train of thought to racism.
My advice to you: don't waste your ammunition in this futile way.
Even if you managed to convince the subscribers to this list (which
I'd rate as unlikely, but hey...), it wouldn't make an appreciable
difference to the Big Picture. Dynamic addresses already /are/ widely
blocked, and generic addresses are increasingly being blocked, by
local policies based on the general principle that anyone can offer
mail, but nobody's forced to accept it. Let me be candid with you: if
you hope to operate a properly constituted MTA on the real live
Internet, you better wake up to the reality out there, instead of
hoping to impose your own rules by false analogies.
> This isn't really a helpful statement. Once upon a time, it did
> happen like that. The current situation is a response to the
> unbelievably high volumes of crap emitted from these unsecured and
> un-virus-checked 24/7-connected home PCs. Any responsible mail
> system administrator will not overspec a machine to handle an
> appropriate volume of mail for their organisation (it is equally as
> wrong to underspec it, to be fair). In order to handle the volume of
> this, you have to seriously overspec it.
