I think it makes pretty good sense, and also explains why they currently force all their customers to smart host through them. I guess I'm the first to put up a fight because I'm the first to have a failover solution that negates the smart host option.
-----Original Message----- From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 3:18 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Reverse DNS Advice for outbound email 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> ~ ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm> ~
