From: "Stuart MacDonald" <stuartm@connecttech.com>
To: "'Chase Venters'" <chase.venters@clientec.com>
Cc: "'Krzysztof Halasa'" <khc@pm.waw.pl>, <ellis@spinics.net>,
"'Willy Tarreau'" <w@1wt.eu>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: bogofilter ate 3/5
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 17:05:53 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <08ec01c6d2c1$67e43d10$294b82ce@stuartm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609071307000.31500@turbotaz.ourhouse>
From: Chase Venters [mailto:chase.venters@clientec.com]
> What are you implying - that SpamCop doesn't make decisions
> about who to
> block and who to not block for third parties? Their weasel wording
It's not an implication, it's a fact.
> I will strongly criticize any service that purports to label
> senders of
> automatic responses as senders of unsolicited mail. The
What would you call it then when I receive a bounce/etc that is in
reponse to a message someone else sent? I certainly never solicited
that.
Perhaps you could send me your snail mail address; I'll solicit some
junk mail but put your address down. But don't call it junk mail when
you receive it, because it was solicited!
> And on the specific issue of autoresponders, I think a reasonable
> compromise is to support DomainKeys. That way if a sender is
> irritated
> that they are receiving automatic responses from messages they didn't
> send, they can personally take action to invalidate the forgery.
IMO one should never have to receive "automatic responses from
messages they didn't send".
> But mark my words: Asking hosts to stop sending bounce messages or
> automatic responses is insane and contrary to over a decade
> of established
> postmaster precedent.
Things change.
..Stu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-07 21:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-06 5:37 bogofilter ate 3/5 Rick Ellis
2006-09-06 18:00 ` Willy Tarreau
2006-09-06 18:04 ` Willy Tarreau
2006-09-06 18:56 ` ellis
2006-09-06 19:15 ` Chase Venters
2006-09-06 20:56 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2006-09-06 22:05 ` Chase Venters
2006-09-07 11:55 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2006-09-07 13:46 ` Chase Venters
2006-09-07 22:33 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2006-09-07 22:37 ` Chase Venters
2006-09-07 22:58 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2006-09-07 23:02 ` Matti Aarnio
2006-09-07 13:58 ` Stuart MacDonald
2006-09-07 14:01 ` [OT] " Chase Venters
2006-09-07 14:27 ` Chase Venters
2006-09-07 17:35 ` Stuart MacDonald
2006-09-07 18:25 ` Chase Venters
2006-09-07 21:05 ` Stuart MacDonald [this message]
2006-09-07 9:52 ` Matti Aarnio
2006-09-06 20:13 ` Willy Tarreau
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-09-05 23:57 [RFC 0/5] dio: clean up completion phase of direct_io_worker() Zach Brown
2006-09-06 4:35 ` bogofilter ate 3/5 Zach Brown
2006-09-06 5:00 ` Willy Tarreau
2006-09-06 7:22 ` Mike Galbraith
2006-09-08 22:16 ` Matthias Andree
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='08ec01c6d2c1$67e43d10$294b82ce@stuartm' \
--to=stuartm@connecttech.com \
--cc=chase.venters@clientec.com \
--cc=ellis@spinics.net \
--cc=khc@pm.waw.pl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=w@1wt.eu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.