🚀 go-pugleaf

"Dave {Reply address in.sig}" <noone@llondel.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>In article <34c238b4.1663293@news.demon.co.uk>
>   john@assen.demon.co.uk.nospam (John McCabe) writes:
>> Hi there,
>> 
>> Here is a brief suggestion I hope you might consider (if you haven't
>> already).
>> 
>> A lot of junk mail has the source address set to 99876@12345.com and
>> other such crap. Would it be posible to implement a regular expression
>> matching algorithm for use in the mail kill so that rather than
>> *@compuserve.com, I could use e.g. [0-9]*@compuserve.com to represent
>> any purely numerical user field?
>> 
>A better bet would be to put in some fancy DNS-lookup stuff, which 
>would get rid of a large amount of junk. Anything without at least an MX 
>record on its source address can them be rejected. Should encourage 
>people to email you with valid addresses and not with a NOSPAM stuck in 
>the middle of their hostname as well :-)

This could be a problem because I have received message from a mail
address that I couldn't look up using WSPing, but that could be
replied to without any problems. Strange huh?


Best Regards
John McCabe <john@assen.demon.co.uk>