Eric "Shubes" wrote:
I agree that there are already a lot of lists out there. The ones that I liked all have either gone away, had serious issues that caused them to be unusable, or changed their policies and made themselves unusable. I was mainly just venting my frustration. I'll look into a vote-type system to link on the wiki somewhere, where we can vote on the RBLs - when I get back this evening. I see where the anti-rbl list could be beneficial, but most of my users are NOT computer people in any way, shape, or form. I have one group of users that I have told 32 times now (I resorted to keeping hash-marks on a sticky-tab every time they called me for this issue) that you cannot email 400M TIFF pictures. They pay well, but they also serious tax my sanity. If I had to then have them give me their IP address or get ANY technical information out of them whatsoever (that includes who their ISP is - really!), it would become a debacle and the owner would force another of his "sit-down" meetings that are a waste of time. In my situation they definetly would not work. But I did see a user on the list a few months back that was using white-lists. From the little I remember he just put the whitelist first in his blacklists file.There appear to be plenty of BLs out there already. I think we simply need to find a way to manage (classify/rate/select) them. Perhaps it'd be useful to set up any easy way for the toaster to use an anti-rbl list (the capability's built in to rblsmtpd). Each admin could then maintain their own anti-rbl list containing addresses they would like to allow. Keeping it up2date would be a challenge though. This would probably only work with an automated update sort of like dyndns. Just a thought.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
