On 2019-10-14 17:10 BST, John Levine via mailop wrote: > In article <[email protected]> you write: > >My question remains unanswered. Why not treat each ip address on its > >own merits? Is it technically infeasible, too expensive, less > >convenient, or what?
> Given the tendency of some networks to move bad senders around to > avoid blocks, from the point of view of the recipients, blocking the > range can prevent a lot of spam with minimal (not necessarily zero) > loss of real mail. Thanks, that seems like a new answer. I think you're saying that checking mail from a given ip address will inevitably allow some spam through before the address is blocked. So if the spammer changes ips, some more spam will get through again from the new ip, a process which can presumably repeat 253 times for a /24. But if you block the entire /24 after N (<< 253) occurrences, the spammer is thwarted. Yes? -- Nick _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list [email protected] https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
