On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 05:21:14PM +0200, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 10:46:11AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 04:42:43PM +0200, Alessandro Vesely wrote: > > >On Tue 20/Aug/2019 19:26:23 +0200 Michael Stone wrote: > > >>>If you are not spamming people you also will not end up on a blacklist. > > >> > > >>Well, actual real-world experience shows that to not be true. > > > > > > > > >You should (noisily) bring out that case! > > > > Why? This isn't exactly news. It seems that some people are living > > in a fantasy world where there are no false positives and that > > people selling blacklists care. > > I can just offer my own experience. After having implemented > SPF & DKIM (over a year ago) I had just one problem with a > not-delivered mail (German provider web.de). Their SMTP bounced > the message with an informative text. After complaining to them, > they fixed it. > > Before SPF & DKIM, big providers (outlook.com, gmail among others) > tended to dump my messages into the receiver's spam folder (an > especially underhanded way of dropping a message without actually > dropping it). > > So from my POV, care & feeding of an own SMTP server is some work, > yes, but perfectly doable. > > There is some responsability on us, who can do it, to keep it > around for as long as possible: mail is still a decentralized > protocol, and that is very valuable. > > Throwing up my hands and saying "it can't be done" is not an > option for me. >
Amen, and thank you. -H -- Henning Follmann | hfollm...@itcfollmann.com
