[SHAME] Spam Rats
nanog-post at rsuc.gweep.net
Thu Jan 10 13:18:02 UTC 2013
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 01:10:48PM +1000, Julian DeMarchi wrote:
> On 01/10/2013 01:06 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> > Who uses it? Or did you see your IP listed in one of those multiple dnsbl
> > query sites and contacted them on general principles even though you didn't
> > see any actual bounced email that could be traced to a spam rats listing?
> Customers use the range. They had a complaint to us that the IP was
> listed by spamrats and thus the issue made it to my queue.
> > That said, it is best practice to set ptr records even for your unassigned
> > ip space
> Mail servers do need to have PTRs, but it is my _choice_ if my hosts
> that do not send mail have PTRs or not. I would not expect anyone to
> block my /24 for lack of PTRs on non-mail-sending hosts.
If you believe that BCP for your own servers is to have PTRs,
are you giving the caveat to your customers that they shouldn't
be running mail service without dealing with you for PTRs? Are
you accepting their mail without these PTRs? :-)
That bit of customer service philosophy aside, two obvious
answers are wildcard (weak) or to hand the customers the keys
to their own fate (best). Just delegate to them. Hopefully you
are at least handing them addresses in clumps to make it less
annoying on your zone files.
RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE / NANOG
More information about the NANOG