On Jan 18, 2008 12:35 PM, Michael Thomas <mike(_at_)mtcc(_dot_)com> wrote:
John L wrote:
In both cases, it leads to the receiver throwing away potentially
useful mail so the inept sysadmin gets pretty much what they deserve.
So why even worry about it at all?
Because my goal is not to punish inept administrators, my goal is to
deliver mail. Inept admins usually have other users who send actual
mail to my users.
Seems to me that you've said that if your goal is to deliver your users'
mail, you dare not use SSP.
If you're that concerned, you shouldn't be using any sort of reputation
and/or filtering since the chance of false positive is > 0. But of
course you do, so you obviously accept the possibility of inept
sysadmins doing themselves harm. Why badly configured SSP is any
different is beyond me. Frankly, I'd be a lot more worried about
badly administered RBL's and their ilk since they aren't accountable
to anybody but themselves.
Mike
Are we seriously saying that we need to be concerned because of inept sysadmins?
I would hate to see the training wheels welded on.
Funny thing about inept sysadmins is that when all of their email
starts to get thrown away, they either fix it or get replaced.
Please let's not try to water this down so much that it becomes useless (again).
Regards,
Damon
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html