[policy] When Tech Meets Policy...
aiversonlists at spamresource.com
Tue Aug 14 16:29:10 UTC 2007
On 8/14/07, Tim Franklin <tim at pelican.org> wrote:
> On Tue, August 14, 2007 1:48 am, Douglas Otis wrote:
> > For domains to play any role in securing email, a published MX record
> > should become a necessary acceptance requirement. Using MX records
> > also consolidates policy locales which mitigates some DDoS concerns.
> What if there's no intention to use the domain for email?
> I've become annoyed enough in the other direction, owning domains *only*
> used for email and dealing with irate people insisting I'm
> domain-squatting and must sell them the domain cheaply right now because
> there's no A record for www.what.ever.
I'm annoyed enough in the original direction. I, like many thousands
of people, have some domains that I don't use for email, so they don't
have an MX record. How do you enforce this new requirement? Who chases
it down? How does it stop domain tasting? If this is ultimately to
stop domain tasting abuse, why not instead stop domain tasting? It
seems like this simply add rules that somebody has to figure out to
who enforce, and I'm not exactly inspired to think that it'll be
enforced regularly or properly.
This seems like creating a requirement that people must implement
mosquito nets to solve the mosquito problem, instead of focusing on
removing the mosquitos.
Al Iverson on Spam and Deliverability, see http://www.spamresource.com
News, stats, info, and commentary on blacklists: http://www.dnsbl.com
My personal website: http://www.aliverson.com -- Chicago, IL, USA
More information about the NANOG