Mailing-List: contact james-user-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "James Users List" <james-user@jakarta.apache.org>
Sender: alan.gerhard@gercom.com
From: "alan.gerhard" <alan.gerhard@gercom.com>
Reply-to: alan.gerhard@gercom.com
To: "James Users List" <james-user@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: RE: POSTMASTER account
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 13:24:58 -0500
Message-id: <3e64ef7a.9f4.25346@gercom.com>

Yes, SPAM does suck.

I was surprised, though why is a mystery to me - that the
required account would be used for SPAM and other related
subject mater.
In reading the material at rfc-ignorant.org, I get this
uneasy feeling that there really isn't much that be done as
one is faced as being taged as non-compliant vs. being
subject for abuse.

I guess I was looking for an organization(s) that actively
go after ISPs that actively break regulations, but
understand it's fruitlessness. I have heard argument for
harder prosecution of those that break the few SPAMing laws
that are on the books and giving more control to a governing
body ...

You mention that the POSTMASTER account is necessary to
service the e-mail infrastructure, but blocking policies may
be used to balance everyi8tnhg out.

Are these just discussions or is there some firm ideas ??


cheers!

> 
> The only laws covering spam are the paucity of laws
> covering spam. Role-based accounts are not separately
> governed.
> 
> The www.rfc-ignorant.org site that I referred you to
> earlier discusses a number of these issues in general. 
> Their comment regarding spam blocking for postmaster@ is:
> 
>     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.)
> 
> Basically, spam sucks, but the postmaster role account has
> an obligation because of the requirement to service the
> e-mail infrastructure.  For James v3, there has been some
> discussion of blocking policies that balance the issues.
> 
>     --- Noel
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: alan.gerhard@gercom.com
> [mailto:alan.gerhard@gercom.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04,
> 2003 10:08 To: James Users List
> Subject: POSTMASTER account
> 
> 
> Guys -
> 
> I learned that the POSTMASTER account is a requirement as
> per RFC (thx noel) so we are required to alias everything
> that goes to POSTMASTER@JamesDomain.Com to the defined
> postmaster account.
> 
> My concern was that this is a simple guarantee delivery
> for spammers - or is there a "law" against using the
> postmaster account ??
> 
> If so, I would like to report a violation :-)
> 
> Anybody know where I can do that ??
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> ----------- To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> james-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional
> commands, e-mail: james-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> ----------- To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> james-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional
> commands, e-mail: james-user-help@jakarta.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: james-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: james-user-help@jakarta.apache.org