Arrogant RBL list maintainers
matthew at sorbs.net
Wed Dec 16 11:01:51 CST 2009
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, Frank Bulk wrote:
>> Two sides of an SP's coin: I want to maximize my e-mail servers'
>> deliverability, so I make sure those have appropriately named PTRs
>> and make
>> sure that outbound messages aren't spammy; I also want to restrict
> The point he was trying to make is that there is no standard for what
> those "appropriately named PTRs" should look like. He has
> forward/reverse that is perfectly ok according to standard
> (forward/reverse matches) and if he had a automatic dictionary for
> naming those IPs instead of putting the IPs there, things would be
> If people want to make standards on how to put information into DNS
> for RBL use, they should take it to the IETF and make a standard out
> of it, not just ad-hoc
I did.. a number of people went out of their way to bury it. One of who
would do anything to bury anything SORBS does (I think we all know who
> create something of their own and expect everybody else to conform. If
> there is an "industry standard" (which the replies here seem to
> indicate), that should be written down and standardized by the people
> who actually make money out of it, in this case Trend Micro. This
> would remove the problem of having to maintain tens or hundred points
> of contacts for "what is dynamic dialup space" which is the problem
> right now as there are a lot of RBLs to deal with.
> Creating a standard on what to put in WHOIS/DNS for
> dynamic/static/infrastructure would make a lot of sense, seems nobody
> is doing it though.
100% with you!!!!
...and if people used "static" and "dynamic" keywords in DNS as I
suggested in my previously mentioned draft, there would be *NO NEED* for
DUL/DUHL/PBL lists at all because people could create a very simple set
of patterns to match and therefore the RBLs would be unneccessary.. (and
it would save me about 10 hours a day, every day of the week, every week
of the year!) Currently I have a few 100 patterns and I know another on
this list has more like the region of 10k patterns to do what in reality
one should be able to do in 2 (10 at the most!). At 10k patterns it
becomes a lot cheaper to use DUL/DUHL/DYNABLOCK to block dynamics, does
anyone wonder why people do?
More information about the NANOG