SORBS Contact

Wed Aug 9 21:12:09 UTC 2006

On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Michael Nicks wrote:
>
>> themselves and their obviously broken practices. We should not have to jump 
>> through hoops to satisfy your requirements.
>
> We were hit by the requirement to include the word "static" in our DNS names 
> to satisfy requirements. It wasn't enough to just say "this /17 is only 
> static IPs, one customer, one IP, no dhcp or other dynamics at all), we 
> actually had to change all PTR records to this arbitrary "standard".

Would people support if there was a defined and standardized way that 
providers can specify if the system with this ip address does or does
not send email? There are several proposal for this but so far ISPs
have not shown sufficient interest in implimenting any one - if
number of ISPs agree to enter some records and it catches on then
the need for 3rd party maintained lists of dynamic ip addresses
would go away.

---

Of course the root cause for all these still remains that certain
OS vendor makes (and contines to) bad security design choices and
this results in users of their system getting infected and being
used as spam zombies. Combined with that is that many ISPs don't
maintain good enough policies to shutdown infected users quickly
or block their accounts from access to SMTP on per-user basis.
Last is sometimes due to low margins and ISPs trying to cut cost
and it is effecting abuse department - which the basicly the one
part of the company that not only not make any money but causes
to loose some business...

--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william at elan.net