[RFCI-Discuss] Postmaster/abuse listings

[Stewart James]

And now I have abswered my own questions..Shoudl really look for updates
mroe often on the rfci website

# After careful consideration, there seemed to be a consensus among users
that use of blacklists, etc., did not meet the "narrowly tailored"
requirements for blocking mail to postmaster, but that it would be
undesirable to list sites simply for employing the MAPS RBL and such on
their postmaster address. It was decided that we wouldn't list folks if
the rejection message for postmaster seemed to indicate the reason for
denial ("{ip} rejected as listed on the MAPS RBL", etc.)

and no one repsponded with RTFM :)

Thanks,

Stewart

On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Stewart James wrote:

> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 09:56:39 +1000 (EST)
> From: Stewart James <stewart.james@vu.edu.au>
> Reply-To: rfci-discuss@lists.megacity.org
> To: rfci-discuss@lists.megacity.org
> Subject: [RFCI-Discuss] Postmaster/abuse listings
>
>
> I have ran into a situation here where aol.com.au has blacklisted my email
> servers for bulk email (AFAIK this is unjustified, would like to know if
> it is not though).
>
> On discovering this I thought I would send aol.com.au postmaster/abuse an
> email asking for why etc. I got a bounce back due to the blacklisting, I
> thought postmaster and sbuse had to be delivered, I know I have my own
> email system accept abuse/postmaster regardlss of any blacklistsings as I
> thought I saw a discussion on this list indicate that all postmaster (and
> I thought abuse a good addition locally) email must be delivered according
> to the RFC's.
>
> Is this correct?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Stewart
>
> (off to make a international call as AOL.com.au can't help)
>
> _______________________________________________
> RFCI-Discuss mailing list
> RFCI-Discuss@lists.megacity.org
> http://lists.megacity.org/mailman/listinfo/rfci-discuss
>