Good point, they should be more accessible. That would be my biggest complaint with most black-lists.
As far as policies - as long as their policy is simply to follow RFCs (or universally agreed recommendations, e.g. no open relays/proxies), I don't see any obligation on their end to try to put everyone on notice. The RFCs were notice enough for years. SPAM from AOL accounts - hm, I have to admit that I only see an (automatically selected) cross-section of spam messages with header (which are routed to SPAMCOP for analysis) - but I can't remember seeing AOL as an implicated party often (if ever). Best Regards Andy Schmidt H&M Systems Software, Inc. 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax: +1 201 934-9206 http://www.HM-Software.com/ -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Holt Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS >AOL is implementing the very same "checks" that we are using in Declude. This is true. >So what's the whining all about? 1. AOL publishes a policy that they don't adhere to. 2. The policy changes regularly. 3. If we have a problem sending mail to them, they are unreachable. 4. They are pointing fingers at us "little guys" as the problem. How many spam have you received from an AOL account? I can only speak for myself, but none of those apply to me. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt > Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 10:40 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS > > Exactly, Chuck. > > AOL is implementing the very same "checks" that we are using in Declude. > So > what's the whining all about? I've been desperately waiting for years for > some of the big players to enforce standards (e.g., reverse DNS) and > prudent practices (e.g., no open relays, mail servers on dynamic IPs > have to relay > through their providers). I applaud AOL and hope Yahoo and Hotmail follow > suit soon. > > Then I can move the Reverse DNS failures and the Open Relay and DUL RBLs > from a carefully chosen weight to straight DELETE - and simply adopt > "industry standards". > > If someone complains, I no longer have to "defend" to business managers, > why > my servers are the "only" ones bouncing some moron's email - because that > point won't be made anymore. > > Even better, it will force wanna-be mail-admin's to either learn their > trade or to get someone do to it right. Not every tinkerer who runs > Windows NT/2000/XP workstation on their DSL or Cable modem at home > needs to run > personal web services and turn on SMTP (ideally in open relay mode) - if > they do, they can do it for their own entertainment. But unless they do it > correctly (e.g., define a smart host), their mails won't be delivered to > the > outside world. Nothing wrong with that. > > Best Regards > Andy Schmidt > > Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) > Fax: +1 201 934-9206 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck Schick > Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:07 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS > > > I will disagree. I do not believe there is any comparison between MS EULA > and AOL mail policies. I do not see AOL's actions as the > "...internet-nazi-police tactics..." as you claim. I do not see where AOL > is gaining any competitive advantage, they are simply trying to protect > their network and client base the same as many of us. I have picked up > many > AOL customers for Internet access because they could no longer stand the > spam in their AOL mail accounts. > > I actually applaud AOL doing this - it will force many people to get a > reverse DNS entry and maybe they will fix their DNS record along the way. > If I block people because of Reverse DNS, the blocked entity will simply > criticize our policies. If AOL blocks them they will fix their rdns. > > If more mail servers had the MX records and reverse DNS entries, I could > tighten up my filtering because I would have less worries about blocking > legitimate mail from badly configured mail servers. > > I guess I do not see the problem - it is not much different than when most > ISPs started blocking Port 25 for access. Or implemented SMTP > Authentication. > > Just me 2 cents on the subject. > > Chuck Schick > ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- > From: "Todd Holt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:32:57 -0800 > > >I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but. > > > >If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using > >their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why don't those > >same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used > >to prevent mail from being delivered? > > > >MS just says that you can't use certain apps on their OS. AOL says > >that you can't deliver mail through mail servers (that control more > >email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it "bad" > >through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say "monopolistic" policies. > > > >The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not > >upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain > >about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of > >AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How > >short sided!!! > > > >Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints > >by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has > >thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by > >competitors. It's obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease > >whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers > >just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt > >Xidix Technologies, Inc > >Las Vegas, NV USA > >www.xidix.com > >702.319.4349 > > > > --- > [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus > (http://www.declude.com)] > > --- > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, > just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe > Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at > http://www.mail-archive.com. > > --- > [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus > (http://www.declude.com)] > > --- > This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type > "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at > http://www.mail-archive.com. > --- > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus > (http://www.declude.com)] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
