On 17-Jan-99 04:49:03, Russell Nelson wrote something about "Three solutions for
spam". I just couldn't help replying to it, thus:
> Most spam comes from one of three sources:
> 1) spamhauses. The RBL blocks these.
MAPS RBL.
> 2) open relays.
ORBS RBL (which I'm happy to see has returned).
> 3) dialups.
DUL RBL.
Actually, I'm not too happy about blocking dialups in general since these
people haven't done anything wrong. I'd be much happier if Internet providers
would put their trial users into a separate subnet, which could then be
blocked, without affecting honest dialup users.
> Consult the DNS to see if the host has a name. Reject the mail if it
> doesn't.
Probably a good idea, but
> Consult the DNS to see if the host's name has
> an MX record. If it doesn't, reject the mail.
???
> The downside of these fixes are that they carry a lot of collateral
> damage.
The latter one of you suggestions surely will. You'd be lucky to get any
mail at all.
Assuming that (heaven forbid) this was actually widely deployed, exactly
what would you have achieved, except for 4 billion extra MX records to stress
test the DNS?
Regards,
/������������������������������T�����������������������������������������\
| Rask Ingemann Lambertsen | [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| Registered Phase5 developer | WWW: http://www.gbar.dtu.dk/~c948374/ |
| A4000, 775 kkeys/s (RC5-64) | "ThrustMe" on XPilot and EFnet IRC |
| It's bad luck to be superstitious. |
