Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 08:52:16 +0300 From: Ion-Mihai "IOnut" Tetcu <itetcu@FreeBSD.org> To: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Ion-Mihai IOnut Tetcu <itetcu@freebsd.org>, jumper99@gmx.de Subject: Re: Attn. "Helmut Schneider" <jumper99@gmx.de> Message-ID: <20060519085216.5e20f114@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <m3d5eb58a1.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org> References: <20060518132527.37c9d23d@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <m3d5eb58a1.fsf@merlin.emma.line.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Sig_2Dwy8WD=ec4HooinmtND=5R
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, 18 May 2006 23:32:06 +0200
Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> wrote:
> As I can inject my message directly to GMX, I'm Cc'ing Helmut Schneider.
Thank you.
=20
> Ion-Mihai "IOnut" Tetcu <itetcu@freebsd.org> writes:
>=20
> > gmx.de stupidly blocks mails from guys with @freebsd.org emails :)
> >
> > freebsd.org descriptive text "v=3Dspf1 ip4:216.136.204.119 ~all"
> > means that listed ip is _NOT_ the only one legitimate SMTP server for f=
reebsd.org.
> >
> > This last shit is nothing new as, in my experience, gmx.de is one of the
As someone you I should thank pointed out on private, I used
inappropriate language in the sentence above; this is because I faulty
translated from my own language where, like in French, one of the
synonyms is considered OK.
Please accept my apologies for this.
> > worse administered email servers. You might want to change your email
> > address to some other service, with at least half-competent admins.
>=20
> Wrong- the downstream is free to decide what to make of SPF information.
>=20
> GMX are responsive compared to other freemailers such as web.de which
> are utter crap.
In _my_ experience their default is, more or less: everyone outside our
network is suspect, anyone outside the half on Germany we like should
be blocked. I don't think this attitude is the right one, but, of
course, it's everyone right to accept mail or not; one still expects
mails to postmaster and other RFC addresses to be answered.
To make it short, I have long renounced to have anything to do with
them, either for myself or my customers.
[ GMX anti-spam settings info ]
Thank you, I will take the liberty to point anyone questioning about
GMX to this email.
> > <jumper99@gmx.de>: host mx0.gmx.net[213.165.64.100] said: 550-5.7.1 {mx=
021} The
> > recipient does not accept mails from 'FreeBSD.org' over foreign
> > mailservers. 550-5.7.1 According to the domain's SPF record your ho=
st
> > '81.196.204.98' is not a designated sender. 550 5.7.1 (
> > http://www.gmx.net/serverrules ) (in reply to RCPT TO command)
>=20
> And this looks like the "Spamserver-Blocker" in action.
>=20
> Personally, I have both The Spamserver Blocker and currently also the
> Global Antispam list off. I might turn the latter back on some day
> though, if traffic becomes too much to handle for after-the-fact
> filtering.
Personally I relay on mail/dspam for spam filtering. It serve me and my
clients very well, with something like Overall Accuracy: 99.40%
--=20
IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
"Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect"
BOFH excuse #86:
Runt packets
--Sig_2Dwy8WD=ec4HooinmtND=5R
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFEbV0jBX6fi0k6KXsRAi1hAJ9FbmUQmOEw7y3Qw/MXKUaeIs33HwCgzRgy
KuyCL+SyXX0yZ55C8wpTuMk=
=Lh+O
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Sig_2Dwy8WD=ec4HooinmtND=5R--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060519085216.5e20f114>