also sprach Paul Johnson <baloo@ursine.ca> [2005.06.19.1404 +0200]:
> Why pay someone else to do what I can do myself for free?
The problem is not you, the problem are the other morons who think
like you *and* can't operate mail servers. With that I mean: I have
no reason to believe that you cannot operate a mail server, so don't
read this as an attack at all. But for everyone who can operate
a mail server, 1000 others run one and have no clue. Thus, it's
a good idea to restrict the set of IPs that are to act as legitimate
mail servers, and DUL is one way to do so effectively.
also sprach Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk> [2005.06.19.1405 +0200]:
> > These days, any moron and their father can set up a mail server
> > with proper queuing. That does not mean they can protect it
> > against relaying.
>
> And because some (alot) can do it wrong, noone should be allowed
> to do it?
Countries like America seem to work like this across the entire
legal system. :)
Jonas then said:
> No, I don't want the ISPs of those networks to decide how emails
> should be treated.
For what it's worth: how do you know they don't intercept the mail
that your mail spool then sends out? There is very little keeping
them from inserting transparent filters into the SMTP channel; I've
seen it done.
Point being: if you don't trust your ISP, switch! If you cannot,
learn to deal, get politically active and work on antitrust, or
move.
I have no further intention to argue my position here for I am
perfectly aware that people disagree. I maintain that I think DUL
are a good thing and I will continue using them.
--
Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :' : proud Debian developer, admin, user, and author
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
"convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
- friedrich nietzsche
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature