North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: ATTBI refuses to do reverse DNS?
- From: Jared Mauch
- Date: Tue Jun 18 21:18:53 2002
And it will continue to work that way.
That is the quality work of the people who spend many
man-hours putting together such a system that is robust enough
that when i decide that when you send me e-mail (not via a list)
from a host that has no reverse dns, i can easily flag that for
What you are missing here is that, while yes, you can
send e-mail from firstname.lastname@example.org to people, they may say "hmm, e-mail
from an ip address is not typical of the people that i communicate
with", and therefore treat it differntly. just like policy-routing
but for your mailbox.
it is a good reflection of provider clue(tm). even if they
have rev-192.168.0.1.example.com. as their reverse dns, it's slightly
more responsible (imho) than nothing/nxdomain.
On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 05:48:29PM -0700, Patrick Thomas wrote:
> Hi - what if I don't _want_ a domain name ? Last time I checked all of
> the standard Internet protocols worked just fine with just an IP - thank
> you for imposing your own sense of expediency and "convenience" on me and
> then arbitrarily breaking the network for me when I choose not to
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, Jared Mauch wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 04:54:54PM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> > >
> > > Thus spake "Stephen Griffin" <email@example.com>
> > > > The lack of clue tends to be on the providing in-addr side of
> > > > things. I think it is a great thing to refuse connections from
> > > > ips without in-addr, in the same way it is great to refuse mail
> > > > from domains that don't provide postmaster addresses.
> > >
> > > On first reading, I thought that was sarcasm. Now I realize you're serious.
> > I've found that filtering out mail from
> > people that have no reverse dns tends to typically point to
> > a) open-relays, b) spam, c) lack of working abuse/postmaster.
> > > > It is a means through which one can influence the laziness of
> > > > others. Simply disregarding what others do, only legitimizes
> > > > the laziness, and continues us along the road of everyone
> > > > doing the absolute minimum.
> > > > ...
> > > > You neglect to include the option of the customer changing
> > > > to an ISP that provides in-addr.
> > >
> > > So, if you ran Amazon.com, you wouldn't accept money from customers of clueless
> > > ISPs?
> > You can't do it on the store side, but you can do it on the
> > residental customer side, or at least give those messages a higher
> > level of attention in any overall spam score for a message.
> > > Sadly, even that level of coercion wouldn't be anywhere near enough to motivate
> > > most ISPs. And your (non-)customers will be caught in the crossfire.
> > Anyone that sends e-mail to me from a host/server with no reverse
> > dns I will not see. It is not rejected w/ 400/500 series code
> > as I know some people do. it goes to it's own 'spam' folder.
> > I have found that some companies (american express) for
> > example can not seem to make their systems have reverse dns, and
> > they suffer from the lack of a working postmaster/hostmaster
> > address too.
> > It just means i read that folder once every few days and
> > periodically send e-mail to people i know that have hit the filter
> > or other legit folks.
> > - jared
> > --
> > Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from firstname.lastname@example.org
> > clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from email@example.com
clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.