On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 06:34:47PM -0700, Michael Peddemors wrote: > On October 20, 2009, [email protected] wrote: > > Getting back to this issue: I don't see any problem with prejudice against > > poorly constructed network infrastructures that can't bother to adhere to > > the SMTP standard (RFC1912 section 2.1). This is something that any > > network admin who should legitimately be managing a mail server should be > > able to fix with a single phone call (please correct me if this sentence > > is prejudiced in any way). > > > > The SMTP standard requires a server's rDNS must match the server's reported > > name (thus the IP must have rDNS), and most allocated IPs have them anyway > > (even if they're wrong or ~dynamic, e.g. RDNS_DYNAMIC). There is also a > > growing number of deployments that block improper FCrDNS at the door > > (RDNS_NONE is a subset of failing FCrDNS). > > > > MagicMail Servers have been blocking all email at the connection level that > do > not have rDNS now for the past couple of years, except when SMTP AUTH is > presented, and we haven't had an F/P reported in over a year.
Maybe I'm beating a dead horse but.. http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20091021-r826376-n/RDNS_NONE/detail Hopefully you didn't mean that MagicMail somehow is an authority on the stats or a good example to follow. Even if this isn't users list, you should never imply that RDNS_NONE is safe to block at general 2% ham rate. Of course it's up to the site policy, but be prepared to.. - Listen to user complains - Create a large whitelist - Deal with imbeciles and hope they fix the DNS _some_ day ;-)
