Address Assignment Question
jerome at ceriz.fr
Mon Jun 20 20:27:54 CDT 2011
2011/6/21 Tony Finch <dot at dotat.at>:
> Spamhaus. And none of your complaints apply to them.
Oh really ? So the blame is to throw at Google Docs administrators for
beeing blacklisted (on the SBL, which should contain only "verified
spam source", thus implying discussion with the service manager) ? And
BTW, who is Spamhaus to claim any legitimacy about who can or can't
register a domain ? (referal to the .at phishing campaign).
Alright, those are probably exceptions, and _some_ lists may be
usefull, but obviously noone can claim to have an efficient "zero
false-positive" list. Blindly relying on those lists _will_ lead to
false positives and are a comodity for mail server administrators that
might lead to sloopy filtering and weaker control over their mail
Also, such lists are _centralized_ systems that *might* (worst case
scenario) be spotted for attacks. What would be your mail
infrastructure load if you rely on a list that disapear overnight ?
Yeah, right, anycasted DNS infrastructure, redundancy over 4
continents, that's fine for most of us ('til it fails).
In my opinion, the use of RBLs as a first level filter for incoming
mail, instead of greylisting, rDNS and strict protocol compliance
(cluttered with some Exchange bug-compatibility perhaps), is less
reliable, so it's against what I shall consider as a best practice.
I hope that clarifies my point of view, and please excuse me for the
previous insults, I just have a hard time reading "hey, my critical
services are dependant of an external, centralized entity with no
transparency and that's good for the Internet" without compulsive
expressions including F. words.
More information about the NANOG