RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
I always thought the significant drivers on the IETF were reps of the major players. Burzin Isn't the IETF supposed to be this body? _M At 09:14 PM 12/16/2003, you wrote: I would agree with this type of governing body. One that sets standards like RDNS entries and what they mean. pessimistic rant But it is still up to each mail admin(s) to implement an anti-spam policy. And the history of governing bodies is such that only the biggest players have a voice. This would probably mean that AOL, Earthlink, RR, Hotmail, etc would be on the governing council and it would be interpreted to their greatest competitive advantage and nothing would have changed! /pessimistic rant Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hosting Support Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 4:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS This is exactly why I think we should have a some sort of global internet council for setting standards, rather than all of us little guys having to react, after the fact, whenever a large player makes a change. The global council could maintain a distribution list to help mail admins to keep up with proposed changes and implementation schedules. This is very similar to any other industry that must keep up with compliance standards. In some ways this also seems like an unfair competition tactic as it makes the little guys look bad when our customers can't send mail to AOL...it encourages customers to move to the large players to avoid not having mail delivered to their users. Darin. - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Todd Holt To: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 7:32 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why dont those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered? MS just says that you cant use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you cant deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies. The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!! Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. Its obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Hi, I just noticed that AOL has stepped up their policies another notch. They used to say that AOL **MAY** not accept email from servers without Reverse DNS. In the last two weeks, that changed: http://postmaster.aol.com/guidelines/standards.htmlhttp://postmaster.aol.com/guidelines/standards.html * AOL's servers will not accept connections from unsecured systems. These include open relays, open proxies, open routers, or any other system that has been determined to be available for unauthorized use. * AOL's mail servers will not accept connections from systems that use dynamically assigned or residential IP addresses. * AOL will not deliver e-mail that contains a hex-encoded Universal Resource Locator (URL). (Ex: http://%6d%6e%3f/) * AOL's mail servers will reject connections from any IP address that does not have reverse DNS (a PTR record). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM Systems Software, Inc. 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 http://www.hm-software.com/http://www.HM-Software.com/ -- Burzin Sumariwalla Phone: (314) 994-9411 x291 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: (314) 997-7615 Pager: (314) 407-3345 Networking and Telecommunications Manager Information Technology Services St. Louis County Library District 1640 S. Lindbergh Blvd. St. Louis, MO 63131 --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] --- [This E-mail
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Probably, but if so, they're not doing their job. We need an organization that is less ivory tower and more proactive in enforcing standards and best practices. Darin. - Original Message - From: Pete McNeil To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 10:38 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Isn't the IETF supposed to be this body?_MAt 09:14 PM 12/16/2003, you wrote: I would agree with this type of governing body. One that sets standards like RDNS entries and what they mean. pessimistic rantBut it is still up to each mail admin(s) to implement an anti-spam policy. And the history of governing bodies is such that only the biggest players have a voice. This would probably mean that AOL, Earthlink, RR, Hotmail, etc would be on the governing council and it would be interpreted to their greatest competitive advantage and nothing would have changed!/pessimistic rantTodd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Hosting SupportSent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 4:47 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNSThis is exactly why I think we should have a some sort of global internet council for setting standards, rather than all of us little guys having to react, after the fact, whenever a large player makes a change. The global council could maintain a distribution list to help mail admins to keep up with proposed changes and implementation schedules. This is very similar to any other industry that must keep up with compliance standards.In some ways this also seems like an unfair competition tactic as it makes the little guys look bad when our customers can't send mail to AOL...it encourages customers to move to the large players to avoid not having mail delivered to their users.Darin.- Original Message - From: Todd Holt To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 7:32 PMSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNSI know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why dont those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered?MS just says that you cant use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you cant deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies.The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!!Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. Its obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings.Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy SchmidtSent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:26 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNSHi,I just noticed that AOL has stepped up their policies another notch.They used to say that "AOL **MAY**" not accept email from servers without Reverse DNS. In the last two weeks, that changed:http://postmaster.aol.com/guidelines/standards.html AOL's servers will not accept connections from unsecured systems. These include open relays, open proxies, open routers, or any other system that has been determined to be available for unauthorized use. AOL's mail servers will not accept connections from systems that use dynamically assigned or residential IP addresses. AOL will not deliver e-mail that contains a hex-encoded Universal Resource Locator (URL). (Ex: http://%6d%6e%3f/) AOL's mail servers will reject connections from any IP address that does not have reverse DNS (a PTR record). Best RegardsAndy SchmidtHM Systems Software, Inc.600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)Fax: +1 201 934-9206http://www.HM-Software.com/
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Title: Message This is a common perception... and one that I share to some extent. None the less, it's not an easy problem. The network runs on consensus - and that is nearly impossible to build and enforce. Ultimately, we hope, what works will win out and become recognized as a standard. That is more likely than any body creating a "standard" and then "enforcing" it into place. Some, with the power and money to do so, are capable of pushing their "standards" onto the 'net... and that is both good and bad. I guess my point is this: Picking somebody other than IETF to do this would most likely change the name but produce the same result. Giving any strong enforcement power to any such body would be disastrous because that power would quickly be abused either directly or through compromise. Imagine, for example, if VeriSign were in charge (chaching!) of how everything worked on the Internet! (I know from personal experience that they would love that... they may even feel entitled to it from some of the conversations I've overheard.) It's not an easy problem. Theanswer resides in real solutions - not in enforcement. You can't pry a good working solution from the cold dead hands of a good systems admin - or even most mediocre ones, but you can be pretty sure that almost every systems admin (good, bad, and ugly) will avoid using a bad solution no matter what enforcement might be at work - if they have any alternative at all. The Internet is an interesting training ground for real life problems we've yet to deal with on this planet. It only works when it really works... network effects create tremendous leverage...but opportunities tocompromise the system for local motiveswill be exploited if they can be - even if that means killing off the whole thing. (sad but we treat each other this way too more often than not...) Broader vision and altruism are often missing from the decision making process - so any single point of authority with significant power finds itself corrupted and manipulated - if not from the inside then from the outside. Often we forget that we're all connected. Often when folks say that the solution is in some strong central authority that can enforce a proper standard, they are really saying "everything would be fine if everyone would just do what I say." These folks fail to consider what it would be like if they got their wish, but the "authority" decided to do things that they couldn't live with. Be careful what you wish for - you might get it. The Internet is a great model for this kind of problem - a problem that we face every day without recognizing it. Humans have not yet discovered how to work and solve these problems (at least not en-mass)- but perhapsthey will now that we can face them from a different perspective. It's easy to forget we all breath the same air, but not so easy to forget when your email isn't working ;-) The IETF, like any body attempting to do that job, is mostly stuck battling a never ending storm of conflicting self interest on the part of the participants. When we (all) figure out how to solve those problems more efficiently then good standards will emerge and consensus will be easier to develop. In the mean time, it's a race to develop good working solutions and hope they catch on before too much damage is done - for all I know this method might even be the model solution in the end... It seems to work in nature - competing diversity, with successful paradigms sweeping away the old... broad communication and collaboration offering advantage to those who participate... it makes me think... Sorry for all the philosophy... _M PS: A Beautiful Mind was a great movie (IMO). There was a great moment wheresomecomplex realities of economics were crystallized and made transparent - I love when that happens.Let's not all "go for the blonde". -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hosting SupportSent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 9:51 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Probably, but if so, they're not doing their job. We need an organization that is less ivory tower and more proactive in enforcing standards and best practices. Darin. - Original Message - From: Pete McNeil To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 10:38 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Isn't the IETF supposed to be this body?_MAt 09:14 PM 12/16/2003, you wrote: I would agree with this type of governing body. One that sets standards like RDNS entries and what they mean. pessimistic rantBut it is still up to each mail admin(s) to implement an anti-spam policy. And the history of governing bodies is such that only the biggest players have a voice. This would probably mean tha
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
AOL is implementing the very same checks that we are using in Declude. This is true. So what's the whining all about? 1. AOL publishes a policy that they don't adhere to. 2. The policy changes regularly. 3. If we have a problem sending mail to them, they are unreachable. 4. They are pointing fingers at us little guys as the problem. How many spam have you received from an AOL account? I can only speak for myself, but none of those apply to me. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 10:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Exactly, Chuck. AOL is implementing the very same checks that we are using in Declude. So what's the whining all about? I've been desperately waiting for years for some of the big players to enforce standards (e.g., reverse DNS) and prudent practices (e.g., no open relays, mail servers on dynamic IPs have to relay through their providers). I applaud AOL and hope Yahoo and Hotmail follow suit soon. Then I can move the Reverse DNS failures and the Open Relay and DUL RBLs from a carefully chosen weight to straight DELETE - and simply adopt industry standards. If someone complains, I no longer have to defend to business managers, why my servers are the only ones bouncing some moron's email - because that point won't be made anymore. Even better, it will force wanna-be mail-admin's to either learn their trade or to get someone do to it right. Not every tinkerer who runs Windows NT/2000/XP workstation on their DSL or Cable modem at home needs to run personal web services and turn on SMTP (ideally in open relay mode) - if they do, they can do it for their own entertainment. But unless they do it correctly (e.g., define a smart host), their mails won't be delivered to the outside world. Nothing wrong with that. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck Schick Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:07 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS I will disagree. I do not believe there is any comparison between MS EULA and AOL mail policies. I do not see AOL's actions as the ...internet-nazi-police tactics... as you claim. I do not see where AOL is gaining any competitive advantage, they are simply trying to protect their network and client base the same as many of us. I have picked up many AOL customers for Internet access because they could no longer stand the spam in their AOL mail accounts. I actually applaud AOL doing this - it will force many people to get a reverse DNS entry and maybe they will fix their DNS record along the way. If I block people because of Reverse DNS, the blocked entity will simply criticize our policies. If AOL blocks them they will fix their rdns. If more mail servers had the MX records and reverse DNS entries, I could tighten up my filtering because I would have less worries about blocking legitimate mail from badly configured mail servers. I guess I do not see the problem - it is not much different than when most ISPs started blocking Port 25 for access. Or implemented SMTP Authentication. Just me 2 cents on the subject. Chuck Schick -- Original Message -- From: Todd Holt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:32:57 -0800 I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but. If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why don't those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered? MS just says that you can't use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you can't deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies. The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!! Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. It's obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Title: Message Hi Pete, I do agree with you on all of the problems you present in regards to a governing body that can enforce it's will. However, I think we're already there to some degree with the fact that companies like AOL can enforce policies locally that impact others and force them to adapt to their wishesexcept that it's N companies instead of a singlestandards board This is not a much differentfrom the "be careful what you wish for" scenario you mentioned, just more chaotic. You're certainly right on target on the "If everyone would just do it like I do it" point. However, I think we all realize compromises will be necessary when working together, and I strongly believe that these problems will not be solved without cooperation. I think my main point is still key: I'd much rather be forced into compliance by a standards body that has agreed on a course of action and notifies me of necessary changes ahead of time than by N companies that all make changes without notifying me, forcing me to scramble to address the howling concerns of my customers. Yes, it is possible that the standards might be expensive enough to implement to drive some small companies out of business, but that's not much different from the attrition we can see from customers moving to large companies in order to ensure their email gets delivered to other customers of said company. So, yes, you're right. There will be problems, and it's not a perfect solution, but I think if the IETF or some other body can gain enough power to enforce standardsthat are the consensus of the majority (probably best based on customer base) it's the best chance we have. Darin. - Original Message - From: Pete McNeil To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:02 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS This is a common perception... and one that I share to some extent. None the less, it's not an easy problem. The network runs on consensus - and that is nearly impossible to build and enforce. Ultimately, we hope, what works will win out and become recognized as a standard. That is more likely than any body creating a "standard" and then "enforcing" it into place. Some, with the power and money to do so, are capable of pushing their "standards" onto the 'net... and that is both good and bad. I guess my point is this: Picking somebody other than IETF to do this would most likely change the name but produce the same result. Giving any strong enforcement power to any such body would be disastrous because that power would quickly be abused either directly or through compromise. Imagine, for example, if VeriSign were in charge (chaching!) of how everything worked on the Internet! (I know from personal experience that they would love that... they may even feel entitled to it from some of the conversations I've overheard.) It's not an easy problem. Theanswer resides in real solutions - not in enforcement. You can't pry a good working solution from the cold dead hands of a good systems admin - or even most mediocre ones, but you can be pretty sure that almost every systems admin (good, bad, and ugly) will avoid using a bad solution no matter what enforcement might be at work - if they have any alternative at all. The Internet is an interesting training ground for real life problems we've yet to deal with on this planet. It only works when it really works... network effects create tremendous leverage...but opportunities tocompromise the system for local motiveswill be exploited if they can be - even if that means killing off the whole thing. (sad but we treat each other this way too more often than not...) Broader vision and altruism are often missing from the decision making process - so any single point of authority with significant power finds itself corrupted and manipulated - if not from the inside then from the outside. Often we forget that we're all connected. Often when folks say that the solution is in some strong central authority that can enforce a proper standard, they are really saying "everything would be fine if everyone would just do what I say." These folks fail to consider what it would be like if they got their wish, but the "authority" decided to do things that they couldn't live with. Be careful what you wish for - you might get it. The Internet is a great model for this kind of problem - a problem that we face every day without recognizing it. Humans have not yet discovered how to work and solve these problems (at least not en-mass)- but perhapsthey will now that we can face them from a different perspective. It's easy to forget we all breath the same air, but not so easy to forget when your email isn't working ;-) The IETF, like any body attempting to do that job, is mostly stuck battling a never ending storm of conflicting self interest on the
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Good point, they should be more accessible. That would be my biggest complaint with most black-lists. As far as policies - as long as their policy is simply to follow RFCs (or universally agreed recommendations, e.g. no open relays/proxies), I don't see any obligation on their end to try to put everyone on notice. The RFCs were notice enough for years. SPAM from AOL accounts - hm, I have to admit that I only see an (automatically selected) cross-section of spam messages with header (which are routed to SPAMCOP for analysis) - but I can't remember seeing AOL as an implicated party often (if ever). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM Systems Software, Inc. 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 http://www.HM-Software.com/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Holt Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS AOL is implementing the very same checks that we are using in Declude. This is true. So what's the whining all about? 1. AOL publishes a policy that they don't adhere to. 2. The policy changes regularly. 3. If we have a problem sending mail to them, they are unreachable. 4. They are pointing fingers at us little guys as the problem. How many spam have you received from an AOL account? I can only speak for myself, but none of those apply to me. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 10:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Exactly, Chuck. AOL is implementing the very same checks that we are using in Declude. So what's the whining all about? I've been desperately waiting for years for some of the big players to enforce standards (e.g., reverse DNS) and prudent practices (e.g., no open relays, mail servers on dynamic IPs have to relay through their providers). I applaud AOL and hope Yahoo and Hotmail follow suit soon. Then I can move the Reverse DNS failures and the Open Relay and DUL RBLs from a carefully chosen weight to straight DELETE - and simply adopt industry standards. If someone complains, I no longer have to defend to business managers, why my servers are the only ones bouncing some moron's email - because that point won't be made anymore. Even better, it will force wanna-be mail-admin's to either learn their trade or to get someone do to it right. Not every tinkerer who runs Windows NT/2000/XP workstation on their DSL or Cable modem at home needs to run personal web services and turn on SMTP (ideally in open relay mode) - if they do, they can do it for their own entertainment. But unless they do it correctly (e.g., define a smart host), their mails won't be delivered to the outside world. Nothing wrong with that. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck Schick Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:07 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS I will disagree. I do not believe there is any comparison between MS EULA and AOL mail policies. I do not see AOL's actions as the ...internet-nazi-police tactics... as you claim. I do not see where AOL is gaining any competitive advantage, they are simply trying to protect their network and client base the same as many of us. I have picked up many AOL customers for Internet access because they could no longer stand the spam in their AOL mail accounts. I actually applaud AOL doing this - it will force many people to get a reverse DNS entry and maybe they will fix their DNS record along the way. If I block people because of Reverse DNS, the blocked entity will simply criticize our policies. If AOL blocks them they will fix their rdns. If more mail servers had the MX records and reverse DNS entries, I could tighten up my filtering because I would have less worries about blocking legitimate mail from badly configured mail servers. I guess I do not see the problem - it is not much different than when most ISPs started blocking Port 25 for access. Or implemented SMTP Authentication. Just me 2 cents on the subject. Chuck Schick -- Original Message -- From: Todd Holt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:32:57 -0800 I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but. If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why don't those same people get upset
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Darin wrote: I think if the IETF or some other body can gain enough power to enforce standards that are the consensus of the majority (probably best based on customer base) it's the best chance we have. The IETF or other independent body will not be able to enforce any standards, they can make recommendations. And it is up to the internet community to implement the standards and enforce the standards. The standards are enforced wny people do not bend the rules for server or DNS that is not in complience. For example I notify all admins and users that their mail is being held due to DNS configuration errors. When admins do not notify other admins there is an issue with their configuration that is where the system breaks down. So I applaud the big boys for finally enforcing the current standards by blocking invalid reverse dns settings. Here is AOL's definition of a inproperly configured RDNS entry. -- snip from postmaster.aol.com -- Reverse DNS must be in the form of a fully-qualified domain name reverse DNSes containing in-addr.arpa are not acceptable, as these are merely placeholders for a valid PTR record. Reverse DNSes consisting only of IP addresses are also not acceptable, as they do not correctly establish the relationship between domain and IP address. -- end snip -- They are enforcing the standards already out there. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Hosting Support Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 9:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Hi Pete, I do agree with you on all of the problems you present in regards to a governing body that can enforce it's will. However, I think we're already there to some degree with the fact that companies like AOL can enforce policies locally that impact others and force them to adapt to their wishesexcept that it's N companies instead of a single standards board This is not a much different from the be careful what you wish for scenario you mentioned, just more chaotic. You're certainly right on target on the If everyone would just do it like I do it point. However, I think we all realize compromises will be necessary when working together, and I strongly believe that these problems will not be solved without cooperation. I think my main point is still key: I'd much rather be forced into compliance by a standards body that has agreed on a course of action and notifies me of necessary changes ahead of time than by N companies that all make changes without notifying me, forcing me to scramble to address the howling concerns of my customers. Yes, it is possible that the standards might be expensive enough to implement to drive some small companies out of business, but that's not much different from the attrition we can see from customers moving to large companies in order to ensure their email gets delivered to other customers of said company. So, yes, you're right. There will be problems, and it's not a perfect solution, but I think if the IETF or some other body can gain enough power to enforce standards that are the consensus of the majority (probably best based on customer base) it's the best chance we have. Darin. - Original Message - From: Pete McNeil To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:02 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS This is a common perception... and one that I share to some extent. None the less, it's not an easy problem. The network runs on consensus - and that is nearly impossible to build and enforce. Ultimately, we hope, what works will win out and become recognized as a standard. That is more likely than any body creating a standard and then enforcing it into place. Some, with the power and money to do so, are capable of pushing their standards onto the 'net... and that is both good and bad. I guess my point is this: Picking somebody other than IETF to do this would most likely change the name but produce the same result. Giving any strong enforcement power to any such body would be disastrous because that power would quickly be abused either directly or through compromise. Imagine, for example, if VeriSign were in charge (chaching!) of how everything worked on the Internet! (I know from personal experience that they would love that... they may even feel entitled to it from some of the conversations I've overheard.) It's not an easy problem. The answer resides in real solutions - not in enforcement. You can't pry a good working solution from the cold dead hands of a good systems admin - or even most mediocre ones, but you can be pretty sure that almost every systems admin (good, bad, and ugly) will avoid using a bad solution no matter what enforcement might be at work - if they have any alternative at all. The Internet is an interesting training ground for real life problems we've yet to deal with on this planet. It only works when it really works
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Hi Kevin, I'm not against AOL for doing this, as you would see from following the thread. What I intended to convey is that we need a lot more standards and enforcement of them (e.g. blacklists, dial up lists, port 25 blocking for dynamic addresses, etc.), as well as the all-important notification of new standards to be implemented/enforced. Perhaps an initial standard could be that all mail admins subscribe to a given notification list for policy changes, standards announcements, enforcement, etc. Again, I don't have a problem with what AOL did, I just think changes should be conveyed ahead of time when standards are enforced so the community can prepare. Could AOL be reasonably expected to notify all mail admins around the world that they were changing their procedures? No, of course not. And their HELO did respond with a meaningful, though from our experience inaccurate, announcement. That's why I point to the need for a central body to maintain the standards and NOTIFY subscribed mail admins. In our case, we did have RDNS in place, but from some reason AOL refused us since it didn't match the mail server name. Once we got that changed all was well. If we had had a lot of virtual email domains, as opposed to dedicated IPs for mail services, that would have been much more of a pain that it was. My $0.02 has multiplied...sorry to those who are tired of this topic. Darin. - Original Message - From: Kevin Bilbee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 2:16 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Darin wrote: I think if the IETF or some other body can gain enough power to enforce standards that are the consensus of the majority (probably best based on customer base) it's the best chance we have. The IETF or other independent body will not be able to enforce any standards, they can make recommendations. And it is up to the internet community to implement the standards and enforce the standards. The standards are enforced wny people do not bend the rules for server or DNS that is not in complience. For example I notify all admins and users that their mail is being held due to DNS configuration errors. When admins do not notify other admins there is an issue with their configuration that is where the system breaks down. So I applaud the big boys for finally enforcing the current standards by blocking invalid reverse dns settings. Here is AOL's definition of a inproperly configured RDNS entry. -- snip from postmaster.aol.com -- Reverse DNS must be in the form of a fully-qualified domain name - reverse DNSes containing in-addr.arpa are not acceptable, as these are merely placeholders for a valid PTR record. Reverse DNSes consisting only of IP addresses are also not acceptable, as they do not correctly establish the relationship between domain and IP address. -- end snip -- They are enforcing the standards already out there. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Hosting Support Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 9:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Hi Pete, I do agree with you on all of the problems you present in regards to a governing body that can enforce it's will. However, I think we're already there to some degree with the fact that companies like AOL can enforce policies locally that impact others and force them to adapt to their wishesexcept that it's N companies instead of a single standards board This is not a much different from the be careful what you wish for scenario you mentioned, just more chaotic. You're certainly right on target on the If everyone would just do it like I do it point. However, I think we all realize compromises will be necessary when working together, and I strongly believe that these problems will not be solved without cooperation. I think my main point is still key: I'd much rather be forced into compliance by a standards body that has agreed on a course of action and notifies me of necessary changes ahead of time than by N companies that all make changes without notifying me, forcing me to scramble to address the howling concerns of my customers. Yes, it is possible that the standards might be expensive enough to implement to drive some small companies out of business, but that's not much different from the attrition we can see from customers moving to large companies in order to ensure their email gets delivered to other customers of said company. So, yes, you're right. There will be problems, and it's not a perfect solution, but I think if the IETF or some other body can gain enough power to enforce standards that are the consensus of the majority (probably best based on customer base) it's the best chance we have. Darin. - Original Message - From: Pete McNeil To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:02 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
SPAM from AOL accounts - hm, I have to admit that I only see an (automatically selected) cross-section of spam messages with header (which are routed to SPAMCOP for analysis) - but I can't remember seeing AOL as an implicated party often (if ever). I am interpreting this statement as you don't think AOL users are a source of spam. Here is a small sample of addresses in our kill.lst that have been added because they send spam: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] If AOL is so interested in stopping spam, they should start with their own users! I think that they only want to stop inbound spam because that doesn't come from paying customers. Outbound spam, on the other hand, shouldn't be touched (in AOLs terms) because you wouldn't want to make a paying customer mad, would you? Well I scan all emails, both directions. It's a violation of our TOS to send spam and I want to stop it. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 10:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Good point, they should be more accessible. That would be my biggest complaint with most black-lists. As far as policies - as long as their policy is simply to follow RFCs (or universally agreed recommendations, e.g. no open relays/proxies), I don't see any obligation on their end to try to put everyone on notice. The RFCs were notice enough for years. SPAM from AOL accounts - hm, I have to admit that I only see an (automatically selected) cross-section of spam messages with header (which are routed to SPAMCOP for analysis) - but I can't remember seeing AOL as an implicated party often (if ever). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM Systems Software, Inc. 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 http://www.HM-Software.com/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Holt Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS AOL is implementing the very same checks that we are using in Declude. This is true. So what's the whining all about? 1. AOL publishes a policy that they don't adhere to. 2. The policy changes regularly. 3. If we have a problem sending mail to them, they are unreachable. 4. They are pointing fingers at us little guys as the problem. How many spam have you received from an AOL account? I can only speak for myself, but none of those apply to me. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 10:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Exactly, Chuck. AOL is implementing the very same checks that we are using in Declude. So what's the whining all about? I've been desperately waiting for years for some of the big players to enforce standards (e.g., reverse DNS) and prudent practices (e.g., no open relays, mail servers on dynamic IPs have to relay through their providers). I applaud AOL and hope Yahoo and Hotmail follow suit soon. Then I can move the Reverse DNS failures and the Open Relay and DUL RBLs from a carefully chosen weight to straight DELETE - and simply adopt industry standards. If someone complains, I no longer have to defend to business managers, why my servers are the only ones bouncing some moron's email - because that point won't be made anymore. Even better, it will force wanna-be mail-admin's to either learn their trade or to get someone do to it right. Not every tinkerer who runs Windows NT/2000/XP workstation on their DSL or Cable modem at home needs to run personal web services and turn on SMTP (ideally in open relay mode) - if they do, they can do it for their own entertainment. But unless they do it correctly (e.g., define a smart host), their mails won't be delivered to the outside world. Nothing wrong with that. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck Schick Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:07 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS I will disagree. I do not believe there is any comparison between MS EULA and AOL mail policies. I do not see AOL's actions as the ...internet-nazi-police
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Todd: Oh I often see email that has a mail from of [EMAIL PROTECTED] - which means nothing. In most cases, these are bogus addresses. I can generate tons of spam that appears to come from YOUR email address - even though you are not a spammer. What counts is, whether the mail was actually sent from AOL's mail servers. When I trace the TRUE source of the email, it usually is never truly from AOL. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Holt Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 07:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS SPAM from AOL accounts - hm, I have to admit that I only see an (automatically selected) cross-section of spam messages with header (which are routed to SPAMCOP for analysis) - but I can't remember seeing AOL as an implicated party often (if ever). I am interpreting this statement as you don't think AOL users are a source of spam. Here is a small sample of addresses in our kill.lst that have been added because they send spam: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] If AOL is so interested in stopping spam, they should start with their own users! I think that they only want to stop inbound spam because that doesn't come from paying customers. Outbound spam, on the other hand, shouldn't be touched (in AOLs terms) because you wouldn't want to make a paying customer mad, would you? Well I scan all emails, both directions. It's a violation of our TOS to send spam and I want to stop it. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 10:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Good point, they should be more accessible. That would be my biggest complaint with most black-lists. As far as policies - as long as their policy is simply to follow RFCs (or universally agreed recommendations, e.g. no open relays/proxies), I don't see any obligation on their end to try to put everyone on notice. The RFCs were notice enough for years. SPAM from AOL accounts - hm, I have to admit that I only see an (automatically selected) cross-section of spam messages with header (which are routed to SPAMCOP for analysis) - but I can't remember seeing AOL as an implicated party often (if ever). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM Systems Software, Inc. 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 http://www.HM-Software.com/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Holt Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS AOL is implementing the very same checks that we are using in Declude. This is true. So what's the whining all about? 1. AOL publishes a policy that they don't adhere to. 2. The policy changes regularly. 3. If we have a problem sending mail to them, they are unreachable. 4. They are pointing fingers at us little guys as the problem. How many spam have you received from an AOL account? I can only speak for myself, but none of those apply to me. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 10:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Exactly, Chuck. AOL is implementing the very same checks that we are using in Declude. So what's the whining all about? I've been desperately waiting for years for some of the big players to enforce standards (e.g., reverse DNS) and prudent practices (e.g., no open relays, mail servers on dynamic IPs have to relay through their providers). I applaud AOL and hope Yahoo and Hotmail follow suit soon. Then I can move the Reverse DNS failures and the Open Relay and DUL RBLs from a carefully chosen weight to straight DELETE - and simply adopt industry standards. If someone complains, I no longer have to defend to business managers, why my servers are the only ones bouncing some moron's email - because that point won't be made anymore. Even better, it will force wanna-be mail-admin's to either learn their trade or to get someone do to it right. Not every tinkerer who runs Windows NT/2000/XP workstation on their DSL or Cable modem at home needs to run personal web services and turn on SMTP (ideally in open
[Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Title: Message Hi, I just noticed that AOL has stepped up their policies another notch. They used to say that "AOL **MAY**" not accept email from servers without Reverse DNS. In the last two weeks, that changed: http://postmaster.aol.com/guidelines/standards.html AOL's servers will not accept connections from unsecured systems. These include open relays, open proxies, open routers, or any other system that has been determined to be available for unauthorized use. AOL's mail servers will not accept connections from systems that use dynamically assigned or residential IP addresses. AOL will not deliver e-mail that contains a hex-encoded Universal Resource Locator (URL). (Ex: http://%6d%6e%3f/) AOL's mail servers will reject connections from any IP address that does not have reverse DNS (a PTR record). Best RegardsAndy SchmidtHM Systems Software, Inc.600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)Fax: +1 201 934-9206http://www.HM-Software.com/
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Title: Message I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why dont those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered? MS just says that you cant use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you cant deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies. The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!! Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. Its obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Hi, I just noticed that AOL has stepped up their policies another notch. They used to say that AOL **MAY** not accept email from servers without Reverse DNS. In the last two weeks, that changed: http://postmaster.aol.com/guidelines/standards.html AOL's servers will not accept connections from unsecured systems. These include open relays, open proxies, open routers, or any other system that has been determined to be available for unauthorized use. AOL's mail servers will not accept connections from systems that use dynamically assigned or residential IP addresses. AOL will not deliver e-mail that contains a hex-encoded Universal Resource Locator (URL). (Ex: http://%6d%6e%3f/) AOL's mail servers will reject connections from any IP address that does not have reverse DNS (a PTR record). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM Systems Software, Inc. 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax: +1 201 934-9206 http://www.HM-Software.com/
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Title: Message This is exactly why I think we should have a some sort of global internet council for setting standards, rather than all of us little guys having to react, after the fact, whenever a large player makes a change. The global council could maintain a distribution list to help mail admins to keep up with proposed changes and implementation schedules. This is very similar to any other industry that must keep up with compliance standards. In some ways this also seems like an unfair competition tactic as it makesthe little guyslook bad when our customers can't send mail to AOL...it encourages customers to move to the large players to avoid not having mail delivered to their users. Darin. - Original Message - From: Todd Holt To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 7:32 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why dont those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered? MS just says that you cant use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you cant deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies. The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!! Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. Its obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy SchmidtSent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:26 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Hi, I just noticed that AOL has stepped up their policies another notch. They used to say that "AOL **MAY**" not accept email from servers without Reverse DNS. In the last two weeks, that changed: http://postmaster.aol.com/guidelines/standards.html AOL's servers will not accept connections from unsecured systems. These include open relays, open proxies, open routers, or any other system that has been determined to be available for unauthorized use. AOL's mail servers will not accept connections from systems that use dynamically assigned or residential IP addresses. AOL will not deliver e-mail that contains a hex-encoded Universal Resource Locator (URL). (Ex: http://%6d%6e%3f/) AOL's mail servers will reject connections from any IP address that does not have reverse DNS (a PTR record). Best RegardsAndy SchmidtHM Systems Software, Inc.600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)Fax: +1 201 934-9206http://www.HM-Software.com/
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Title: Message OK I have to reply to this one. Nice comparrison. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Todd HoltSent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 4:33 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why dont those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered? MS just says that you cant use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you cant deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies. The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!! Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. Its obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy SchmidtSent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:26 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Hi, I just noticed that AOL has stepped up their policies another notch. They used to say that "AOL **MAY**" not accept email from servers without Reverse DNS. In the last two weeks, that changed: http://postmaster.aol.com/guidelines/standards.html AOL's servers will not accept connections from unsecured systems. These include open relays, open proxies, open routers, or any other system that has been determined to be available for unauthorized use. AOL's mail servers will not accept connections from systems that use dynamically assigned or residential IP addresses. AOL will not deliver e-mail that contains a hex-encoded Universal Resource Locator (URL). (Ex: http://%6d%6e%3f/) AOL's mail servers will reject connections from any IP address that does not have reverse DNS (a PTR record). Best RegardsAndy SchmidtHM Systems Software, Inc.600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)Fax: +1 201 934-9206http://www.HM-Software.com/
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Title: Message I would agree with this type of governing body. One that sets standards like RDNS entries and what they mean. pessimistic rant But it is still up to each mail admin(s) to implement an anti-spam policy. And the history of governing bodies is such that only the biggest players have a voice. This would probably mean that AOL, Earthlink, RR, Hotmail, etc would be on the governing counciland it would be interpreted to their greatest competitive advantageand nothing would have changed! /pessimistic rant Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hosting Support Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 4:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS This is exactly why I think we should have a some sort of global internet council for setting standards, rather than all of us little guys having to react, after the fact, whenever a large player makes a change. The global council could maintain a distribution list to help mail admins to keep up with proposed changes and implementation schedules. This is very similar to any other industry that must keep up with compliance standards. In some ways this also seems like an unfair competition tactic as it makesthe little guyslook bad when our customers can't send mail to AOL...it encourages customers to move to the large players to avoid not having mail delivered to their users. Darin. - Original Message - From: Todd Holt To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 7:32 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why dont those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered? MS just says that you cant use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you cant deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies. The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!! Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. Its obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Hi, I just noticed that AOL has stepped up their policies another notch. They used to say that AOL **MAY** not accept email from servers without Reverse DNS. In the last two weeks, that changed: http://postmaster.aol.com/guidelines/standards.html AOL's servers will not accept connections from unsecured systems. These include open relays, open proxies, open routers, or any other system that has been determined to be available for unauthorized use. AOL's mail servers will not accept connections from systems that use dynamically assigned or residential IP addresses. AOL will not deliver e-mail that contains a hex-encoded Universal Resource Locator (URL). (Ex: http://%6d%6e%3f/) AOL's mail servers will reject connections from any IP address that does not have reverse DNS (a PTR record). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM Systems Software, Inc. 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax: +1 201 934-9206 http://www.HM-Software.com/
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Title: Message Totally agree. I know we'll always be at their mercy, but at least we would have some warning then...grin Darin. - Original Message - From: Todd Holt To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 9:14 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS I would agree with this type of governing body. One that sets standards like RDNS entries and what they mean. pessimistic rant But it is still up to each mail admin(s) to implement an anti-spam policy. And the history of governing bodies is such that only the biggest players have a voice. This would probably mean that AOL, Earthlink, RR, Hotmail, etc would be on the governing council and it would be interpreted to their greatest competitive advantage and nothing would have changed! /pessimistic rant Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hosting SupportSent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 4:47 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS This is exactly why I think we should have a some sort of global internet council for setting standards, rather than all of us little guys having to react, after the fact, whenever a large player makes a change. The global council could maintain a distribution list to help mail admins to keep up with proposed changes and implementation schedules. This is very similar to any other industry that must keep up with compliance standards. In some ways this also seems like an unfair competition tactic as it makesthe little guyslook bad when our customers can't send mail to AOL...it encourages customers to move to the large players to avoid not having mail delivered to their users. Darin. - Original Message - From: Todd Holt To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 7:32 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why dont those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered? MS just says that you cant use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you cant deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies. The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!! Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. Its obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy SchmidtSent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:26 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Hi, I just noticed that AOL has stepped up their policies another notch. They used to say that "AOL **MAY**" not accept email from servers without Reverse DNS. In the last two weeks, that changed: http://postmaster.aol.com/guidelines/standards.html AOL's servers will not accept connections from unsecured systems. These include open relays, open proxies, open routers, or any other system that has been determined to be available for unauthorized use. AOL's mail servers will not accept connections from systems that use dynamically assigned or residential IP addresses. AOL will not deliver e-mail that contains a hex-encoded Universal Resource Locator (URL). (Ex: http://%6d%6e%3f/) AOL's mail servers will reject connections from any IP address that does not have reverse DNS (a PTR record). Best RegardsAndy SchmidtHM Systems Software, Inc.600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)Fax: +1 201 934-9206http://www.HM-Software.com/
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Isn't the IETF supposed to be this body? _M At 09:14 PM 12/16/2003, you wrote: I would agree with this type of governing body. One that sets standards like RDNS entries and what they mean. pessimistic rant But it is still up to each mail admin(s) to implement an anti-spam policy. And the history of governing bodies is such that only the biggest players have a voice. This would probably mean that AOL, Earthlink, RR, Hotmail, etc would be on the governing council and it would be interpreted to their greatest competitive advantage and nothing would have changed! /pessimistic rant Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Hosting Support Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 4:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS This is exactly why I think we should have a some sort of global internet council for setting standards, rather than all of us little guys having to react, after the fact, whenever a large player makes a change. The global council could maintain a distribution list to help mail admins to keep up with proposed changes and implementation schedules. This is very similar to any other industry that must keep up with compliance standards. In some ways this also seems like an unfair competition tactic as it makes the little guys look bad when our customers can't send mail to AOL...it encourages customers to move to the large players to avoid not having mail delivered to their users. Darin. - Original Message - From: Todd Holt To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 7:32 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why dont those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered? MS just says that you cant use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you cant deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies. The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!! Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. Its obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Hi, I just noticed that AOL has stepped up their policies another notch. They used to say that AOL **MAY** not accept email from servers without Reverse DNS. In the last two weeks, that changed: http://postmaster.aol.com/guidelines/standards.html AOL's servers will not accept connections from unsecured systems. These include open relays, open proxies, open routers, or any other system that has been determined to be available for unauthorized use. AOL's mail servers will not accept connections from systems that use dynamically assigned or residential IP addresses. AOL will not deliver e-mail that contains a hex-encoded Universal Resource Locator (URL). (Ex: http://%6d%6e%3f/) AOL's mail servers will reject connections from any IP address that does not have reverse DNS (a PTR record). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM Systems Software, Inc. 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax: +1 201 934-9206 http://www.HM-Software.com/
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Todd, I suspect no one has an issue with what AOL is doing is because we are so close to the situation (i.e. we are all trying to block spam). Darrell Todd Holt writes: I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but. If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why don't those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered? MS just says that you can't use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you can't deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies. The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!! Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. It's obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Hi, I just noticed that AOL has stepped up their policies another notch. They used to say that AOL **MAY** not accept email from servers without Reverse DNS. In the last two weeks, that changed: http://postmaster.aol.com/guidelines/standards.html * AOL's servers will not accept connections from unsecured systems. These include open relays, open proxies, open routers, or any other system that has been determined to be available for unauthorized use. * AOL's mail servers will not accept connections from systems that use dynamically assigned or residential IP addresses. * AOL will not deliver e-mail that contains a hex-encoded Universal Resource Locator (URL). (Ex: http://%6d%6e%3f/) * AOL's mail servers will reject connections from any IP address that does not have reverse DNS (a PTR record). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM Systems Software, Inc. 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 http://www.HM-Software.com/ Check Out DLAnalyzer a comprehensive reporting tool for Declude Junkmail Logs - http://www.dlanalyzer.com --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
I will disagree. I do not believe there is any comparison between MS EULA and AOL mail policies. I do not see AOL's actions as the ...internet-nazi-police tactics... as you claim. I do not see where AOL is gaining any competitive advantage, they are simply trying to protect their network and client base the same as many of us. I have picked up many AOL customers for Internet access because they could no longer stand the spam in their AOL mail accounts. I actually applaud AOL doing this - it will force many people to get a reverse DNS entry and maybe they will fix their DNS record along the way. If I block people because of Reverse DNS, the blocked entity will simply criticize our policies. If AOL blocks them they will fix their rdns. If more mail servers had the MX records and reverse DNS entries, I could tighten up my filtering because I would have less worries about blocking legitimate mail from badly configured mail servers. I guess I do not see the problem - it is not much different than when most ISPs started blocking Port 25 for access. Or implemented SMTP Authentication. Just me 2 cents on the subject. Chuck Schick -- Original Message -- From: Todd Holt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:32:57 -0800 I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but. If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why don't those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered? MS just says that you can't use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you can't deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies. The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!! Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. It's obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
. AOL will not deliver e-mail that contains a hex-encoded Universal Resource Locator (URL). (Ex: http://%6d%6e%3f Contains it where, in the body? John Tolmachoff Engineer/Consultant/Owner eServices For You --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Not much comfort to those admins that are being blocked by AOL when their servers are setup correctly. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of DLAnalyzer Support Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 8:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Todd, I suspect no one has an issue with what AOL is doing is because we are so close to the situation (i.e. we are all trying to block spam). Darrell Todd Holt writes: I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but. If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why don't those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered? MS just says that you can't use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you can't deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies. The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!! Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. It's obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 3:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS Hi, I just noticed that AOL has stepped up their policies another notch. They used to say that AOL **MAY** not accept email from servers without Reverse DNS. In the last two weeks, that changed: http://postmaster.aol.com/guidelines/standards.html * AOL's servers will not accept connections from unsecured systems. These include open relays, open proxies, open routers, or any other system that has been determined to be available for unauthorized use. * AOL's mail servers will not accept connections from systems that use dynamically assigned or residential IP addresses. * AOL will not deliver e-mail that contains a hex-encoded Universal Resource Locator (URL). (Ex: http://%6d%6e%3f/) * AOL's mail servers will reject connections from any IP address that does not have reverse DNS (a PTR record). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM Systems Software, Inc. 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 http://www.HM-Software.com/ Check Out DLAnalyzer a comprehensive reporting tool for Declude Junkmail Logs - http://www.dlanalyzer.com --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS
Exactly, Chuck. AOL is implementing the very same checks that we are using in Declude. So what's the whining all about? I've been desperately waiting for years for some of the big players to enforce standards (e.g., reverse DNS) and prudent practices (e.g., no open relays, mail servers on dynamic IPs have to relay through their providers). I applaud AOL and hope Yahoo and Hotmail follow suit soon. Then I can move the Reverse DNS failures and the Open Relay and DUL RBLs from a carefully chosen weight to straight DELETE - and simply adopt industry standards. If someone complains, I no longer have to defend to business managers, why my servers are the only ones bouncing some moron's email - because that point won't be made anymore. Even better, it will force wanna-be mail-admin's to either learn their trade or to get someone do to it right. Not every tinkerer who runs Windows NT/2000/XP workstation on their DSL or Cable modem at home needs to run personal web services and turn on SMTP (ideally in open relay mode) - if they do, they can do it for their own entertainment. But unless they do it correctly (e.g., define a smart host), their mails won't be delivered to the outside world. Nothing wrong with that. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck Schick Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:07 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL and Reverse DNS I will disagree. I do not believe there is any comparison between MS EULA and AOL mail policies. I do not see AOL's actions as the ...internet-nazi-police tactics... as you claim. I do not see where AOL is gaining any competitive advantage, they are simply trying to protect their network and client base the same as many of us. I have picked up many AOL customers for Internet access because they could no longer stand the spam in their AOL mail accounts. I actually applaud AOL doing this - it will force many people to get a reverse DNS entry and maybe they will fix their DNS record along the way. If I block people because of Reverse DNS, the blocked entity will simply criticize our policies. If AOL blocks them they will fix their rdns. If more mail servers had the MX records and reverse DNS entries, I could tighten up my filtering because I would have less worries about blocking legitimate mail from badly configured mail servers. I guess I do not see the problem - it is not much different than when most ISPs started blocking Port 25 for access. Or implemented SMTP Authentication. Just me 2 cents on the subject. Chuck Schick -- Original Message -- From: Todd Holt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:32:57 -0800 I know this will stir a few people the wrong way, but. If so many people are upset that MS is being monopolistic by using their EULA to prevent software from operating, then why don't those same people get upset at AOL for the internet-nazi-police tactics used to prevent mail from being delivered? MS just says that you can't use certain apps on their OS. AOL says that you can't deliver mail through mail servers (that control more email than any other on the planet) because they deemed it bad through inaccurate, generalized and dare I say monopolistic policies. The lack of complaints about AOL just shows that the MS bashers are not upset about the MS policies (or monopoly), they just want to complain about the big company on the block. I think if the majority owner of AOL was the richest person on the planet, they would bash AOL. How short sided!!! Further, all of the justice dept. proceedings are based on complaints by the competition, not the users. On the other hand, AOL has thousands of consumer complaints, but very few (if any) complaints by competitors. It's obvious that the justice dept. just wants to appease whiny losers like Jim Barksdale and Scott McNealy. And the MS bashers just fall in line. Lemmings. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
