A long time ago, I carefully read the descriptions of the RBL's from
Spamcop. My thoughts were that Spamcop's lists were useful in a scoring
system, not for accept/deny usage as you are doing. Feedback that I see
from those having problems with Spamcop have just re-confirmed my thoughts.
I also use Barracudacentral and abuseat.org plus an inhouse RBL. I found
a delay in listings at abuseat.org before spamhaus got them, so
abuseat.org is useful for early detection.
LCR Computer Services, Inc.
On 6/10/2014 5:46 PM, David Camm wrote:
> interesting thing happened today.
> i got an email form one of my customer domain admins who said several
> of his users were not able to receive emails from both hotmail and
> gmail because we said:
> Final-Recipient: rfc822HIDDEN@....
> Action: failed
> Status: 5.5.0
> Diagnostic-Code: smtp;550 found in RBL (bl.spamcop.net)
> my current rbl list has:
> b.barracudacentral.org (deny)
> cbl.abuseat.org (deny)
> zen.spamhaus.org (deny)
> bl.spamcop.net (deny)
> list.dnswl.org (accept)
> what's the current best practice/thinking about rbls?
> should i get rid of spamcop? others? should i add others that i'm not
> aware of?
> any advice would be greatly appreciated.
> david camm
> advanced web systems
> keller, tx
Last Message | Next Message
Site Map |
Contact Netwin |
POP3 Mail Server |
Linux Webmail |
UnInstall instructions for all products
Copyright © 2017 Netwin Ltd. All rights reserved.