From: Matt Fretwell (no email)
Date: Mon Aug 01 2005 - 16:24:06 EDT
Cami wrote:
> > Why bother compensating? I have a method of naff all tolerance if
> > someone cannot be bothered to configure their system to the best of
> > their abilities. Why keep accepting rubbish. They will never improve
> > whilst they can get away with it.
> Clearly you've never worked in a large environment before.
Did I say I had worked within a large scale corporate/ISP environment?
Some people do work at the smaller end of the scale, you know. i.e: small
to medium businesses.
Anyhow, size is irrelevant. Morals are morals, regardless of size
considerations. I would rather stay working class and earn a hard living
than be middle class, financially, at the cost of ones morals.
> > So far, this draconian attitude has not generated any complaints. If
> > someone does complain, then I can intentionally ignore their
> > complaints in the knowledge that it is annoying someone :) Why should
> > one have to compensate for someone elses folly or ineptitude.
>
> Ignoring their complaints makes you just as bad as them.
>
> If they are taking the time to complain, the least you could do is help
> them understand and fix (what you perceive is) the problem. You would be
> amazed to know there are some sysadmins out there who are willing to
> do what is nessasary to ensure their (clients) mail is delivered to your
> users successfully.
You misunderstand the meaning of complain. Someone requesting help or
information are not complaining. Someone grumbling or moaning rather than
rectifying the problem are complaining. Ignoring complaints does not equal
not advising of a problem. I never said I did not point the problem out to
them, but I do ignore the complaints whilst the misconfiguration persists.
I always check with the customer as to whether said companies are
legitimate contacts. They do get issued details of the problem, if so.
Whitelist or other arsey 'We don't have a problem sending to anyone else'
responses do, however, get ignored. They have been given specific details.
If they then wish to ignore them, that is their choice. At the end of the
day, once the systems are configured correctly, they would have nothing
causing them to be blocked :)
Also, being advised upon MTA morality by someone who will block swathes
of IP's due to the somewhat higher probability of them being non legit
MTA's or zombie machines, without giving them the benefit of the doubt, is
a case of the pot calling the kettle black :) Unless of course, you no
longer block dynamic ranges as a matter of course?
Matt
|
|
|