Re: DNS{B,W}Ls and blocking (was Re: DNSWL will be disabled by default as of tomorrow)

From: Benny Pedersen <me_at_nospam>
Date: Wed Dec 14 2011 - 09:24:47 GMT
To: <users@spamassassin.apache.org>

On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 09:21:47 -0500, David F. Skoll wrote:
> I think we need an informational RFC that specifies best-practices
> for
> a DNS{B,W}L to inform clients that they have been blocked.

good intention, but if dns is blocket there is no result anyway so it
does not work

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Matus UHLAR - fantomas: "Re: DNSWL will be disabled by default as of tomorrow"
Previous message: Michael Scheidell: "Re: solicitations via netsuite.com"
In reply to: David F. Skoll: "DNS{B,W}Ls and blocking (was Re: DNSWL will be disabled by default as of tomorrow)"
Next in thread: David F. Skoll: "Re: DNS{B,W}Ls and blocking (was Re: DNSWL will be disabled by default as of tomorrow)"
Reply: David F. Skoll: "Re: DNS{B,W}Ls and blocking (was Re: DNSWL will be disabled by default as of tomorrow)"
Reply: Kevin A. McGrail: "Re: DNS{B,W}Ls and blocking (was Re: DNSWL will be disabled by default as of tomorrow)"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ By Date ] [ By Thread ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]