This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Suresh Ramasubramanian
ops.lists at gmail.com
Thu May 23 00:51:12 CEST 2019
As for simple graylisting why use a even back then not terribly effective 2000s era technique at all? Also - waiting for a 5xx smtp return code is ideal when deciding that a validation test has failed. You could actually have an email problem that isn't of the shoot yourself in the foot by deploying unsuitable anti spam measures category and have to delay accepting mail. --srs ________________________________ From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists at gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2019 4:18 AM To: Sérgio Rocha; anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") So I don't know about other regions not having the same needs. APNIC has adopted this for example. https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals/prop-125 --srs ________________________________ From: anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net> on behalf of Sérgio Rocha <sergio.rocha at makeitsimple.pt> Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 11:10 PM To: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") There are only one internet, the abuse problem its worldwide, the challenges for better management are the same, that's why all region are looking for the similar responses for the same problems. I support this proposals and other that give more capacity for RIPE deal with abuses. Sérgio Rocha -----Original Message----- From: Piotr Strzyzewski [mailto:Piotr.Strzyzewski at polsl.pl] Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 18:32 PM To: Sérgio Rocha <sergio.rocha at makeitsimple.pt> Cc: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 12:37:07AM +0100, Sérgio Rocha wrote: > > i.e. 1 region on track, 4 still to go (RIPE included here). > > So it looks that this proposal it's not so avant-garde, since the > other regions are having the same needs and one of them already > include this policy The fact that the authori has proposed the same idea in all regions doesn't mean that "other regions are having the same needs". Piotr -- Piotr Strzyżewski Silesian University of Technology, Computer Centre Gliwice, Poland -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20190522/893e5878/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]