AT&T SMTP Admin contact?

Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
Tue Nov 24 12:10:38 CST 2009


On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:50:54 EST, Brad Laue said:
> maintained. I'm unclear as to why mail administrators don't work more 
> proactively with things like SenderID and SPF, as these seem to be far 
> more maintainable in the long-run than an ever-growing list of IP 
> address ranges.

There's a difference between maintainable and usable.  Yes, letting the remote
end maintain their SenderID and SPF is more scalable, and both do at least a
plausible job of answering "Is this mail claiming to be from foobar.com really
from foobar.com?". However, there's like 140M+ .coms now, and  neither of them
actually tell you what you really want to know, which is "do I want e-mail from
foobar.com or not?".  Especially when the spammer is often in cahoots with the
DNS admins...

On the other hand, I can, by looking at my logs, develop a fairly good sense of
"do I have any real non-spam traffic from that address range?". Yes, it's more
work, but it's also more likely to actually answer the question that I wanted
answered.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 227 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20091124/d95f9c93/attachment.bin>


More information about the NANOG mailing list