Le Dim 19 Juin 2005 18:14, Frans Pop a écrit : > On Sunday 19 June 2005 17:48, Simon Richter wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Frans Pop wrote: > > > I think blocking mails based on an address being dynamic/static > > > sucks. > > > > Indeed, but the only systems that send out email from dynamic IP > > addresses are spam zombies (90%[1]) and people who run their own > > MTA, > > You are missing my point which was that you can not trust ISP's to > properly designate an address as being dynamic/static, so blocking on > that basis will also block people who actually _do_ have a static > address. exactly. e.g. I have a static IP, given by my french ISP (free.fr aka proxad.net). they even give me the possibility (without more charges) to set the reverse DNS on that IP. you can check it, the corresponding DNS name is : olympe.madism.org : [madcoder beacon] host olympe.madism.org olympe.madism.org has address 82.225.205.10 [madcoder beacon] host 82.225.205.10 10.205.225.82.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer olympe.madism.org. I know for sure that some rbls lists my IP as a dialup/dynamic IP address. which is wrong. and the reason why I do have an SMTP server on that IP is that I don't like the methods used by french ISP wrt a matter of antispam and antivirus policies. I only trust my methods, since some tests I ran showed that they dropped a too large amount of mails pretending it was spam. Though, I have configured my SMTP server to use smtp.free.fr (which is the SMTP server of my ISP) as the default route for my mail, since I've had too many problems wrt my IP. And believe me, it's *really* displeasing to be blacklisted as a dialup line. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@debian.org OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgp9YRiyeakn2.pgp
Description: PGP signature