Stealth Blocking

Mitch Halmu mitch at
Wed May 23 17:00:50 UTC 2001

On Wed, 23 May 2001, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:

> 	Okay, I don't want to perpetuate this lil battle more than it needs
> to however I do have a few observations that are blindingly glaring to me
> and perhaps been overlooked...
> Mitch Halmu was said to been seen saying:
> > Second, open relays were the norm until Paul Vixie decided you should do
> > otherwise. And in many cases, he convinced thy by brute force that his
> > way is the right way is the only way. But it wasn't the legal way. Most
> > providers bent over and silently took the punishment. We won't. Do I seem
> > to whine here?
> >
> 	Point blank open-relays are not a good idea, they may have when
> the technology was not there to do otherwise but come on, with SMTP AUTH
> and TLS capabilities in most "reputable" mail servers there is absolutely
> no excuse for it. If you remove the open relays you remove a good bit of
> the fscking spam that pollutes the net and annoys the hell out of most
> people. And SMTP AUTH and TLS would not prevent your roaming customers
> from sending and receiving and would actually HELP you verify it is them.
> <snipped what I felt didn't need further encouragement>
> 	Respectfully,
> 	Jeremy T. Bouse

As I answered in a private post to a similar observation, you don't have
to take my word for it. Perhaps you believe what Chip Rosenthal, the daddy
of MAPS TSI, states on his own site about POP-before-SMTP Authorization:
"Our users hated it - particularly those using MS Outlook".


More information about the NANOG mailing list