Arrogant RBL list maintainers

Michelle Sullivan matthew at
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 
> different.
> 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 
that was.)

> 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 mailing list