On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
Reject gooooood, bounce baaaaaaad. [1] Whine all you want about backscatter but until you propose a comprehensive solution that's still reasonably compatible with RFC 2821's section 3.7 you're just talking trash.
no, rich is talking operation pragmatics. more and more these years, rfcs are where the rubber meets the sky.
but if you really like backscatter, i think i can find a few megabytes a day for you. no problem.
Randy, Feel free to bounce as much spam forged with my return address as you like, so long as you first follow at least the bounce suppression criteria I do: No bounce if the message claimed to be from a mailing list. No bounce if the spam scored higher than 8 in spamassassin No bounce if the server which you received the spam from doesn't match my domain's published SPF records evaluated as if "~all" and "?all" are "-all" I figure I can handle the additional -zero- messages... And I can manage it without mysteriously dropping false-positives off into the ether. I agree backscatter is a nasty problem but as solutions go, "reject gooooood, bounce baaaaaaad" sucks. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004