On 2019-12-19 11:01:59 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-dane(_at_)dukhovni(_dot_)org> writes:
Yes, likely the efficacy of the local rules is not reassessed as often
as one might wish, and may be largely complaint driven. That's the
nature of how limited devops cycles are spent. This is not shocking or
I think there is a root disagreement of motives beneath this discussion.
Keith, as he mentions explicitly, is advocating for a reliable email
service, by which I think he means accepting and properly delivering
well-formed mail according to the protocol. It's not clear to me,
however, that reliable email service in that sense is the top priority for
a lot of SMTP server operators.
Right. The top priority for me (currently only operating my personal
mail server) isn't to reliably deliver every spam into my mailbox. It is
to reliably deliver non-spam to my eye-balls. Which requires me to weed
out most of the spam, even though this is perfectly well-formed from a
protocol POV. Because reliable delivery to my eye-balls doesn't work if
there are a few legitimate messages among a deluge of spam.
That was also true when I was running the mail service for a few hundred
users (although the tradeoffs were a bit different then) and I assume it
is very similar for large email providers (although again the tradeoffs
_ | Peter J. Holzer | Story must make more sense than reality.
|_|_) | |
| | | hjp(_at_)hjp(_dot_)at | -- Charles Stross, "Creative writing
__/ | http://www.hjp.at/ | challenge!"
Description: PGP signature
ietf-smtp mailing list