Author: Peter Bowyer Date: To: Exim, Users Subject: Re: [exim] UCEPROTECT Blacklists and why callouts are abusive
On 17/10/06, Marc Perkel <marc@???> wrote: >
>
> Chris Edwards wrote:
> > On Tue, 17 Oct 2006, David Woodhouse wrote:
> >
> >
> > | Yeah, this is just the UCEPROTECT folks being muppets. I'm with Nigel;
> > | they're best ignored.
> >
> > The classic DNSBL argument! Assuming they are muppets, they will
> > ultimately be ignored, with few mail admins using them to block. If
> > however enough mail admins are using them to block as to cause pain to
> > those listed, then one might at least sit and think whether or not their
> > listing policy has some merit afterall.
> >
>
> If you are going to run an RBL to list spammers then that's fine. If you
> are going to use the same RBL to advance a political ajenda then that's
> not fine. If a vendor lists servers in their spam RBL that they know
> aren't spammers then they are muppets.
Correction: As long as UCEPROTECT's policies are published and adhered
to, then the muppets are the people who blindly use their DNSBLs to
block. I could publish a DNSBL which lists all odd-numbered IPs if I
wanted to - only a fool would use that to refuse email.
