On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:39:59 -0400 (EDT) Dean wrote:
DA Real anti-spam groups at large ISPs don't use reverse DNS for spam
DA filtering. There have been attempts to do so in the past, but those
DA ended in (sometimes well-publicized) disasters.
This is patently and provably false. AOL clearly
Dear colleagues,
Dean has already made clear, in a previous exchange on this list, that
he does not think draft-ietf-dnsop-reverse-mapping-considerations in
any revision, past or future, can be made to address his concerns; my
understanding is that this is why he has offered an alternative draft
On Mar 26, 2007, at 7:33 AM, Robert Story wrote:
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:39:59 -0400 (EDT) Dean wrote:
DA Real anti-spam groups at large ISPs don't use reverse DNS for spam
DA filtering. There have been attempts to do so in the past, but
those
DA ended in (sometimes well-publicized)
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Robert Story wrote:
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:39:59 -0400 (EDT) Dean wrote:
DA Real anti-spam groups at large ISPs don't use reverse DNS for spam
DA filtering. There have been attempts to do so in the past, but those
DA ended in (sometimes well-publicized) disasters.
On 26-Mar-2007, at 14:48, Dean Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Robert Story wrote:
DA Assuming an 'apparent inability to update reverse tree' is a
false
DA assumption:
But you can't dictate other peoples assumptions. Assumptions are
often
based on ones personal experiences, and
JINMEI Tatuya / wrote:
At Mon, 26 Feb 2007 16:30:46 -0500,
Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Title : Considerations for the use of DNS Reverse Mapping
Author(s) : D. Senie, A. Sullivan
Filename:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Ted Lemon wrote:
On Mar 20, 2007, at 8:05 PM, Evan Hunt wrote:
But spam fighters are a real constituency, who (so I'm told) get
real and useful information from reverse DNS, and they don't seem to
be very well-represented here.
Spam fighters are very well represented
On Mar 20, 2007, at 8:05 PM, Evan Hunt wrote:
But spam fighters are a real constituency,
who (so I'm told) get real and useful information from reverse DNS,
and
they don't seem to be very well-represented here.
In the original message you were responding to, I believe I said that
noticing
On Mar 19, 2007, at 7:58 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
One thing that popped for me during your presentation today, Andrew,
is that you say that the stupid things people are doing with the
reverse zone have to work. This isn't true.
Yikes. If that's the way I put it, my apologies; it
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 11:06:48PM +0100, Ted Lemon wrote:
Fortunately, in a spam scoring system, as long as you don't use this
as your exclusive score, it's probably okay - hopefully other
indicators will tell you a different story.
Right; this is why I think the security and utility
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dean Anderson wrote:
FYI, I have submitted an alternate draft as an individual submission. It
was submitted after the meeting cutoff and so will not be processed
until Monday, March 19 at 9:00 AM ET, when Internet-Draft posting
resumes.
The
11 matches
Mail list logo
