On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:50 PM, John C Klensin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --On Friday, 14 November, 2008 13:51 -0500 Al Iverson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>... >> This strikes me as unrelated to DNSBLs. Am I misunderstanding? >> How is this DNSBL-specific? > > Al, and others, > > While many of us are less opposed to DNSBLs in principle
You misunderstand. Let's take a step back. > (1) If the system supporting the DNSBL is following the email > protocols and decides to reject the message or bounce it, rather > than, e.g., assigning a score and moving it into the > user-related mail store, it replies back to the IETF list > manager, not the original sender. Let's reword that a bit. > (1) If the system supporting spam filtering is following the email > protocols and decides to reject the message or bounce it, rather > than, e.g., assigning a score and moving it into the > user-related mail store, it replies back to the IETF list > manager, not the original sender. Again, how is this DNSBL-specific? I'm not trying to fight about whether or not DNSBLs are awesome. I'm asking clarification for your point, which I'm not understanding. I'm seeing, for example, a statement that says "DNSBLs do X" when it seems to actually say "non-delivery of mail actually works like *this*", and I am unable to see the connection to DNSBLs. Apologies for not being clearer. Regards, Al Iverson -- Al Iverson on Spam and Deliverability, see http://www.spamresource.com News, stats, info, and commentary on blacklists: http://www.dnsbl.com My personal website: http://www.aliverson.com -- Chicago, IL, USA _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
