[Gllug] RBL listed hosts

[Rev Simon Rumble]

On Wed 12 Jun, Xander D Harkness made the following spurious claims:

> Do the large companies with RBL listed hosts ever get round to fixing 
> them?  This is something that I have not been aware of; however I am 
> sure with a few more servers on reject rather than warn they might be 
> convinced :-)

The whole idea of these lists is to provide encouragement for dodgy
hosts to clean up their act.  The GOOD lists make every effort (yes,
even snail mail and <gasp> the phone) to contact someone who can fix
the problem before listing them.  Then they list them so their users
scream that mail is being lost.

Telstra Big Pond (equivalent to BT's ISP forays--Telstra is the
incumbent monopoly telco in Australia) was RBLed for about a day
before they got in touch.

The biggest problem is that the bounce messages people receive at most
have a line saying "Rejected due to message content."  While the idea
of actually allowing delivery of the email might seem a bad idea,
accepting the message and then constructing a helpful error message
would make these blacklists a LOT more effective.

You just try getting your average Outlook/Exchange user to work out
why their mail is bouncing...

-- 
Rev Simon Rumble <simon at rumble.net>
www.rumble.net
Send email with subject "send key pub" for public key.

Remember that 50% of people are even dumber than the average.
- Iamthefallen on slashdot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/gllug/attachments/20020612/16c2212f/attachment.pgp>