Renaud Allard wrote:
>
> Yves Goergen wrote:
>> On 21.02.2008 13:16 CE(S)T, Graeme Fowler wrote:
>>> ...noting that you should *always* accept postmaster@???
>>> (it's an RFC mandate).
>> I don't know anybody who really cares about that RFC postmaster account.
>> Neither me nor my clients need it, so we're not going to open that
>> standardised spam hatch. If somebody wants to contact the holder of the
>> domain, they can look up a valid contact address in the domain registry
>> or simply visit the web site and read the imprint (which is, as opposed
>> to the RFC, enforced by national law).
>>
>
> Well, just have a look at http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/policy-postmaster.php
> If you are listed there, you may get some spamassassin points.
>
ROFLMAO!
The very same folks who listed the entire '.de' <tld> for two years 'coz
*they* (the rfc-ignorami, not the Deutsche) didn't know how to make a
proper 'whois' query?
And - last time I looked, *still* list other entire <.tld>s?
That crowd could better change their <domain>.<tld> to
'generally-ignorant.org'
..for all they know about RFC's, use of 'whois', or the ability to read
and understand any of the more common Western European languages.
Not even a bad joke.
No one with potential correspondents in the 'wide world' leaves that
spamcheck ruleset active. Nor cooperates with their misguided mis-direction.
That said, it is relatively trivial to set Exim to accept 'proper'
traffic for postmaster@, webmaster@, abuse@, hostmaster@, w/o also
taking spam on-board.
And we should do.
There ARE still helpful folks out there from whom a 'heads up' benefits
all hands.
Bill
