Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages

From	Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.php
Subject	Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages
Date	2015-06-27 10:25 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<mmmblt$4d9$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(10 earlier) <558D0B9F.5050101@arnowelzel.de> <mmjajj$sgm$1@dont-email.me> <558D3C13.3040101@arnowelzel.de> <mmk5k4$6rr$1@dont-email.me> <558E9BF3.3000004@arnowelzel.de>

Show all headers | View raw

On 6/27/2015 8:49 AM, Arno Welzel wrote:
> (Cc: the contact of Eternal September)
> 
> Jerry Stuckle schrieb am 2015-06-26 um 20:29:
> 
>> On 6/26/2015 7:48 AM, Arno Welzel wrote:
> [...]
>>> In the last 15 years it was not "quite common". Maybe it was common in
>>> the mid 1990ies or earlier in your world. But then I wonder, why RFCs
>>> from that time ask for valid sender addresses, if it was common *not* to
>>> use valid addresses. Do the RFC authors try to convince people to do
>>> stupid things which make no sense in the real world? I don't think so.
>>>
>>
>> Back in the days the RFC was written, there were no problems with SPAM
>> and SPAMBOTS mining usenet for email addresses.  A simple CAPTCHA like
>> this is not out of line.  The valid email address can easily be
>> determined by a human, satisfying the intent of the RFC.
> 
> BTW: You use eternal-september.org - did you ever read their terms of use?
> 
> <http://www.eternal-september.org/index.php?showpage=terms>
> 
> Quote:
> 
> Users of the news server news.eternal-september.org are obliged to abide
> by the following rules. Failure to do so will cause immediate
> termination of access rights without prior notice.
> 
> * Sender Address
> 
>   The e-mail addresses given in "From:", "Reply-To:", and "Sender:"
>   SHOULD be yours (i.e. you should be entitled to use it) and SHOULD be
>   valid (= should not bounce because of invalidity). Using addresses
>   and name space of other people without their consent is prohibited.
>

Right.  SHOULD be yours and SHOULD be valid.  I'm not violating any T&C.

> (unquote)
> 
> So - to use the services of eternal-september.org it is *required* to
> use a valid sender address or the TLD ".invalid" according to RFC5537 by
> 2009(!) (<http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5537.txt>) which replaced
> RFC1036 and SON-OF-RFC1036.
> 

You don't understand plain English very well, do you (even though it
isn't your native language, the wording is VERY CLEAR).  But then those
in need of psychiatric care are like that.

> You may not like these rules. But this does not mean, you can just
> ignore them by using an invalid address and call other people "pedantic
> trolls" and "sick".
> 
> 

I'm not ignoring them.  And I'm only calling a sick troll what he is.
You don't like it?  Then get the help you so badly need.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

Thread

response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-10 06:59 -0700
  Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-10 10:18 -0400
  Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-10 16:41 +0200
    Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-10 11:55 -0400
      Re: response for server every second Allodoxaphobia <knock_yourself_out@example.net> - 2015-06-10 16:50 +0000
        Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-10 13:23 -0400
          Re: response for server every second Richard Yates <richard@yatesguitar.com> - 2015-06-10 10:37 -0700
            Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-10 14:27 -0400
    Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-10 23:38 -0700
    Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-11 00:14 -0700
      Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-11 12:09 +0200
        Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-11 04:16 -0700
          Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-11 14:37 +0200
            Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-11 06:20 -0700
              Re: response for server every second Matthew Carter <m@ahungry.com> - 2015-06-11 13:45 -0400
            Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-11 23:35 -0700
              Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-12 09:10 -0400
          Re: response for server every second Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-06-12 03:59 +0000
            [off topic nodejs advertisement] Was Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-15 16:08 +0200
              Performance of PHP vs. Node.js (was: [off topic nodejs advertisement]) "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-06-15 20:42 +0200
                Re: Performance of PHP vs. Node.js Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-16 00:20 +0200
                Re: Performance of PHP vs. Node.js "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-06-16 00:58 +0200
          Re: response for server every second gordonb.890nt@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2015-06-13 13:39 -0500
            Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-18 23:16 -0700
              Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-19 08:16 -0400
                Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-21 23:06 -0700
                Re: response for server every second "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2015-06-22 08:03 -0500
                Re: response for server every second Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 06:39 +0000
                Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-23 07:23 -0400
    Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-22 18:37 +0200
      Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-22 18:42 +0200
      Re: response for server every second Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2015-06-23 17:11 +0200
        Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-24 00:06 +0200
          Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-23 19:10 -0400
            Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-24 01:45 +0200
              Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-23 20:21 -0400
                Re: response for server every second apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-06-23 23:34 -0700
                Re: response for server every second bill <william@TechServSys.com> - 2015-06-24 06:58 -0400
                Re: response for server every second Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-25 17:18 +0200
                Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-25 20:31 -0400
                Technical requiremenets for Usenet messages (was: Re: response for server every second) Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-26 10:43 +0200
                Re: Technical requiremenets for Usenet messages Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-26 21:47 +0200
                Re: Technical requiremenets for Usenet messages Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-26 22:19 +0200
                Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-25 23:07 -0400
                Re: response for server every second Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-26 10:21 +0200
                Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-26 06:48 -0400
                Technical requirements for Usenet messages (was Re: response for server every second) Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-26 13:48 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages (was Re: response for server every second) Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-26 14:29 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-27 14:49 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-27 10:25 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-28 17:52 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-28 20:08 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages "Peter H. Coffin" <hellsop@ninehells.com> - 2015-06-27 22:14 -0500
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-28 17:54 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-28 20:10 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-30 09:54 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-30 08:45 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-06-30 16:20 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-30 15:00 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2015-07-06 13:36 +0200
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-07-06 11:56 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-06 18:54 +0100
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-07-06 16:54 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-07 00:00 +0100
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-07-06 22:08 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-07 07:24 +0100
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-07-07 10:41 -0400
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages apoorv.kanungo@gmail.com - 2015-07-09 22:52 -0700
                Re: Technical requirements for Usenet messages Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 03:07 +0000
                Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-26 21:13 +0200
            Re: response for server every second Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 09:52 +0100
              Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-24 09:21 -0400
                Re: response for server every second Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 18:48 +0100
                Re: response for server every second Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-06-24 20:55 +0200
                Re: response for server every second Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 20:55 +0100
                Re: response for server every second Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2015-06-24 15:21 -0400
                Re: response for server every second Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 20:35 +0100

csiph-web