Post-post disclaimer: No promices on coherency.

I am in desperate need of coffee all of the sudden. So, if something
didnt make sense, question me on it.

And sorry for the few spell-chunker typos in there...


On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 4:12 PM, Micheal Espinola Jr
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> They dont want to customize the PTR for customers because it makes it
> easier for them to audit their network having it reflective of where
> you are on their network.
>
> Its also more work.  But most providers have automation in place to
> all customers to do this themselves - or at least make it easier for
> the provider to handle.
>
> The issue as I see it is that the PTR identifies your host
> specifically, not their network.  The PTR should reflect you as an
> individual domain entity.  If they need/want to audit via DNS names,
> they should internally track their own CNAMEs that point to the real
> customer PTR.  Then they can do whatever they want.
>
> In the end this is all going to bit them in the arse.  Many public
> mail systems not only check or the existence of the PTR, but also
> scrutinize what it says (in terms of appearing like its a residential
> spambot, etc) - and its only going to become more restrict moving
> forward and anti-spam practices require that more and more of these
> DNS record components not only exist - but also MATCH - also ni
> relation to what a mail server is announcing itself as with its HELO
> greeting during the SMTP session.
>
>
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 3:50 PM, N Parr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Thanks for the help everyone, I've already sent them an email telling
>> them they need to change the policy or loose me as a customer.  I also
>> verified with Verizon (only other option) that they support changing the
>> RDNS on their static DSL account also.  So far I can't find anyone other
>> that this one provider that doesn't do it and I told them so.
>> Could you explain what you mean by "their upstream should be auditing
>> their CNAMES?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kennedy, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 2:13 PM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: RE: Reverse DNS Advice for outbound email
>>
>>
>> Outstanding point, and more ammo for your debate with them.
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 3:09 PM
>>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>>> Subject: Re: Reverse DNS Advice for outbound email
>>>
>>> They should be auditing CNAMEs.
>>
>>
>> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
>> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~
>>
>>
>> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
>> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ME2
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~
>



-- 
ME2

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Reply via email to