[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: DynIP mail blocking considered harmful (was: Re: My email is rejected by some sites)



Hi,

Thanks for your useful mail. This thread started to fill my killfile...
:-)

Am Mi, den 17.12.2003 schrieb Karsten M. Self um 01:21:
>   - There are highly specific filters and methods which can effectively
>     discriminate between spam and non-spam content.  Activity-based
>     lists, Bayesian and content-based filters, reputation systems,
>     teergrubbing, rate-limiting, and the like.

Yes, but.

Why should /I/ install lots of software to enable others to have a
mailserver on their DynIP?

But, at that point, I see the discussion drifting away, since my
expression was not against having "a mail server" (BTW: What is a
mailserver? POP3? SMTP? Both? IMAP? A caching-only fetchmail with a
just-inhouse pop3?). I argued against mailservers *without smarthost*. I
also run a smtp that delivers my mails in the background and a
cron-fetchmail that fetches all the mails from mailinglists while I am
still at work - it's just the "direct" mail communication between DynIP
and recipient I'm against. There should be a smarthost that's always "on
air", always accepts answers, is still there in 10 minutes and has a
backup mx in a different network.


> > This is *not* censorship, by the way. 
> 
> No.  It's arbitrary discrimination.

You are not discriminated - just use a smarthost, drive 50 km/h and put
your chewing gum in the dustbin. :-)
Why should my server deal with undeliverable error-messages and no-reply
from now offline machines or reply from a different machine that has
"now" your old IP?

> > > Oh yes, and blacks to the back of the bus, please; just be happy we
> > > let you on at all.
> > 
> > It's a weak argument that requires a comparison to racism to be heard,
> > not to mention that it demeans the plight of those affected by racism.
> 
> The similarity is this:  a secondary indicator is being used to
> establish an absolute preference for or against a specific activity.
> Despite the known invalidity of this indicator in a large number of
> cases.  And the existence of more specific, accurate discriminators.

If black people /would/ use the bus without paying, make noise in the
bus or steal the bus  - it would not be discrimination. 
Since they don't do that more often than others, it /is/ discrimination.

A DynIP-mailserver /does/ indeed often(!) behaves more badly than a
"normal" one. For example, mail to it must often stay on my server since
the DynIP-Server just isn't online, has no backup-mx and it's more often
source of spam.

It's just a form of filtering, like spamassassin. Use the word "f*ck"
and get 1 point. :-) Use a DynIP and get 5. No, it's not fair, since I
like f*cking and I have a DynIP, too, but I prefer to drop 1000 spam
mails even if one real mail gets five points.

BTW: The discussion misses another important point: More and more
providers block ports below 1024. Then you change to another provider?
OK - but then choose one with a reliable smarthost. One never knows...
:-)

Bye, Ratti

-- 
 -o)    fontlinge  | Font management for Linux  | Schriftenverwaltung in Linux
 /\\                                  http://freshmeat.net/projects/fontlinge/
_\_V    http://www.gesindel.de     https://sourceforge.net/projects/fontlinge/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil


Reply to: