Re: Frank Carmickle and Marco Paganini must die
Adam McKenna <adam@flounder.net> writes:
> And I have already indicated to you that I have no interest in arguing
> semantics with you. If your ISP has told you that you have a static IP and
> you are being blocked by people using dynamic-IP DNSBL's, then you have a
> legitimate beef with your ISP.
Huh? A static-IP is an IP that doesn't change. It is not an IP that
is promised not to be on somebody else's list of "dynamic IP
addresses", unless my ISP actually told them that it was dynamic.
I'm not "arguing semantics". I'm arguing not about the meaning of
words; I'm arguing that there is no way to reliably detect than an IP
address is dynamically assigned, short of asking the ISP who assigns
it.
You have utterly failed to give any indication of what method you
think does that. I'm asking about how you think this technical
decision is made, not about the meaning of "dynamic" and "static", but
about how some DNSBL is supposed to know whether my address is dynamic
or static. It seems to me that they simply cannot know, and you keep
telling me that they can, but refusing to actually say how they figure
it out.
Thomas
Reply to: