North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: ATTBI refuses to do reverse DNS?
And it will continue to work that way. That is the quality work of the people who spend many man-hours putting together such a system that is robust enough that when i decide that when you send me e-mail (not via a list) from a host that has no reverse dns, i can easily flag that for further scrutiny. What you are missing here is that, while yes, you can send e-mail from [email protected][1.2.3.4] to people, they may say "hmm, e-mail from an ip address is not typical of the people that i communicate with", and therefore treat it differntly. just like policy-routing but for your mailbox. it is a good reflection of provider clue(tm). even if they have rev-192.168.0.1.example.com. as their reverse dns, it's slightly more responsible (imho) than nothing/nxdomain. - jared On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 05:48:29PM -0700, Patrick Thomas wrote: > > Hi - what if I don't _want_ a domain name ? Last time I checked all of > the standard Internet protocols worked just fine with just an IP - thank > you for imposing your own sense of expediency and "convenience" on me and > then arbitrarily breaking the network for me when I choose not to > participate. > > --PT > > On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, Jared Mauch wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 04:54:54PM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > > > > > > Thus spake "Stephen Griffin" <[email protected]> > > > > The lack of clue tends to be on the providing in-addr side of > > > > things. I think it is a great thing to refuse connections from > > > > ips without in-addr, in the same way it is great to refuse mail > > > > from domains that don't provide postmaster addresses. > > > > > > On first reading, I thought that was sarcasm. Now I realize you're serious. > > > > I've found that filtering out mail from > > people that have no reverse dns tends to typically point to > > a) open-relays, b) spam, c) lack of working abuse/postmaster. > > > > > > It is a means through which one can influence the laziness of > > > > others. Simply disregarding what others do, only legitimizes > > > > the laziness, and continues us along the road of everyone > > > > doing the absolute minimum. > > > > ... > > > > You neglect to include the option of the customer changing > > > > to an ISP that provides in-addr. > > > > > > So, if you ran Amazon.com, you wouldn't accept money from customers of clueless > > > ISPs? > > > > You can't do it on the store side, but you can do it on the > > residental customer side, or at least give those messages a higher > > level of attention in any overall spam score for a message. > > > > > Sadly, even that level of coercion wouldn't be anywhere near enough to motivate > > > most ISPs. And your (non-)customers will be caught in the crossfire. > > > > Anyone that sends e-mail to me from a host/server with no reverse > > dns I will not see. It is not rejected w/ 400/500 series code > > as I know some people do. it goes to it's own 'spam' folder. > > > > I have found that some companies (american express) for > > example can not seem to make their systems have reverse dns, and > > they suffer from the lack of a working postmaster/hostmaster > > address too. > > > > It just means i read that folder once every few days and > > periodically send e-mail to people i know that have hit the filter > > or other legit folks. > > > > - jared > > > > -- > > Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from [email protected] > > clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine. > > > -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from [email protected] clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
|