On 27 Feb 2010, at 13:49, John R. Levine wrote:
there is an MX. Where did you get the idea that not having an MX
>>> offers protection from spambots?
>>
>> That's interesting, but not what I described.
>
> Well, OK. Let me rephrase my question: why do you believe that removing the
> IETF's MX
I am very grateful for the efforts of Henrik and the rest of the tools
team. They provide their services to the entire community with little
recognition and no pay. They try very hard to keep the tools current
and relevant.
When I have found bugs, I have done my best to report them with very
cle
+1
--On Saturday, February 27, 2010 08:49 -0500 "John R. Levine"
wrote:
>>> there is an MX. Where did you get the idea that not having
>>> an MX offers protection from spambots?
>>
>> That's interesting, but not what I described.
>
> Well, OK. Let me rephrase my question: why do you believe
there is an MX. Where did you get the idea that not having an MX
offers protection from spambots?
That's interesting, but not what I described.
Well, OK. Let me rephrase my question: why do you believe that removing
the IETF's MX record will
a) decrease the amount of spam it receives?
b)
On 2010-02-27 13:17 William Allen Simpson said the following:
> Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
>> Your initial 'bugreport' contained no specifics whatsoever.
>>
>> You inappropriately sent the 'tool is broken' message to the whole IETF
>> general discussion list, in addition to addressing me directly (so
On 2010-02-27 04:46 William Allen Simpson said the following:
...
> You are incorrect. Get off your high horse. You should have notified the
> secretariat of the version change weeks ago.
Below is the response from Glen at the secretariat staff to my notification
of the version change, which *wa
On 26 Feb 2010, at 16:45, SM wrote:
At 20:11 25-02-10, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
>> Discussion, please. See below for my take; the IETF is one host, MX is
>> really meaningless, and there are benefits to avoiding a ton of spambot
>> zombie spam.
>
> While we are on this topic, which of the fo
