Re: OT: Martin Krafft - mail bouncing
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 16:42:21 +0200
martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> wrote:
> also sprach Ryan Nowakowski <tubaman@mailandnews.com> [2003.09.21.1609
> +0200]:
> > I was having similar issues with some of my email recipients. Are
> > you on a cable modem, dsl, or dialup? If so, you're probably
> > going to have to configure exim to use your ISP's mailserver as
> > a smarthost.
>
> We have taken the discussion up in private. The problem is in fact
> the dynamic IP of the dialup, which I filter using the dynablock
> RBL. It just happens that these RBL filter > 65% of all my spam
> before it hits the content filters. At peak 150k mails/day this
> makes the difference between a usable system and one that is DoS'ed.
Unfortunately, there are many private victims for false positives of
RBL-like lists, according to them, mostly due to the lack of response
from our ISPs. As a matter of fact, I do have a fixed IP but that is
taken out of a range of IPs mostly used for dynamic assignement. To
make it worse, the ISP denies delegation of the reverse
resolution. The problem is the administration of these RBL lists,
which either tell you that any kind of communication with them will be
published on usenet (including valid email addresses), as they
presuppose that everybody in their list _is_ a spammer, or just don't
give any chance to contact them. Although I can't contribute anything
constructive to the above discussion, I do want to use this context to
apeal these list's users, trying to convince their maintainers, that
false positives do hurt people in many ways and that not being able to
tell them, does'nt really help. Note: I was able to get some of my IPs
out of some lists, but for a limited time only. One of the least
cooperating lists seems to be spamhaus and their associates. People
should really avoid them.
--
Christoph Simon
ciccio@kiosknet.com.br
---
^X^C
q
quit
:q
^C
end
x
exit
ZZ
^D
?
help
.
Reply to: