On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 08:50:07PM +0100, Pigeon wrote: > I am having the same problem. My mail server is neither an open relay > nor a source of spam, but the IP block containing it was blacklisted > by SORBS on May 18 purely on the grounds that the owner of SORBS > doesn't like the look of the generic rDNS for that block, which is of > the form "userXXX.adsl.metronet.co.uk". (My own rDNS has "pigeon" for > "userXXX".) <http://pigeon.dyndns.org/stuff/crapstuff/sorbs.html> You have several mistakes here: 1) Sorbs does not list your IP as an open relay nor as a source of spam. 2) Sorbs deduces correctly that your IP address is a dial-up address. 3) Sorbs does not block your mail. Servers trusting Sorbs do. > Since UK Online > uses SORBS (presumably because the list originally run by their parent > organisation Easynet provided the starting point for SORBS), and my > father is a UK Online customer, the result was that my father thought I > was ignoring his emails for a month (until I found out what was going > wrong) and thought I was ill or worse. If a local email system accepts email for delivery and it is not accepted by the end server, any proper correctly functioning email system would return a bounce that explains why the message was not delivered. Either your ISP's system is broken and does not send bounces, or you father's ISP's system is broken and it null-routes emails, or you simply did not notice the bounces. Sorbs is not the cause of any of these scenarious. > That is the case for my IP block and indeed for all ADSL customers of > my ISP <http://www.metronet.co.uk/>. I don't think I would accept mail directly from such IP addresses. It's not a good idea to run a real mail server on a plain adsl connection nowdays. Use a smarthost. > > and your ISP complies with all the other rules > > that SORBS likes to enforce then you could possibly get this > > decision reversed. > The rules are ridiculous and arbitrary. They are arbitrary, but they catch spam very well and there are practically no false positives (not counting people who really should be using smarthosts). > I don't see why either I or my > ISP should have to jump through ridiculous hoops to resolve this > problem, especially given the arrogant, unhelpful and uncommunicative [...] I really do not see why my servers would need to receive mail servers where admins display such lack of interest in the email service. Tantrums are not the way to go. > The DUHL page on the SORBS website says that the owner of SORBS thinks > that everyone should be made to route their mail through a smarthost. > I object violently to some arrogant little turd trying to force me to > onfigure my mail server in accordance with his personal prejudices. You are free to object but I and many many other people object to receiving email from people like you who do not wan't to play by the same rules as everyone else. Since this is debian-isp, I would like to know if someone has any actual reasons why smarthosting should be considered a bad idea?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature