<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.28.3">
</HEAD>
<BODY>
On Tue, 2013-05-21 at 09:53 +1000, Karl Auer wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<PRE>
On Tue, 2013-05-21 at 09:04 +1000, Noel Butler wrote:
> SHANE wrote:
> > > If the customer isn't getting their mail, you're not doing your job.
>
> Ummm, no, if the clients gets more that could have easily been stopped -
> I'm not doing my job.
And right there is the tension between two equally worthy goals. "Our
job" is making the right judgement and striking the right balance
between the two requirements.
</PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
You will never really make everyone happy, it will never happen, ever doing it Shane's way will only make the spammers happy.<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<PRE>
Dropping an email *only* because the sender has no PTR record, is IMHO
going too far in one direction. The lack of a PTR is just one of many
</PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
quick look at yesterday on just one box <BR>
5xx Reject unknown client host 45.71%<BR>
<BR>
That's a rather large chunk of trash that amavisd doesn't have to look at<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<PRE>
IPv6 (which is where this discussion started!) opens up the local LAN.
NAT disappears, and local subnets become very large, globally
addressable, and globally reachable (modulo any desired firewalling). It
</PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
You don't just chuck a box online do you though, as you indicated you take the time to set up firewalls, as well as what daemons you want to run, again, DNS takes mere seconds, even by to add by hand.<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<PRE>
is *easy* to run servers in the home. No UPnP, no port forwarding,
</PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
True, so when your configuring postfix, dovecot, apache, whatever, configure bind, edit your details in your providers portal if your not authoritative, or a home or small business user can ask their ISP to set PTR, yes, I know, my bad for suggesting somebody actually do some work <IMG SRC="cid:1369119036.7313.9.camel@tardis" ALIGN="middle" ALT=":)" BORDER="0"><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<PRE>
One thing that is *not* likely to change without customer pressure is
the lack of reverse delegation to such peers. Not that it is
</PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
Most decent and serious operators in the U.S. learnt a looooong time ago, back when AOL were a real force, and they added PTR checking, the problem here is, too many lazy people, too many "charged with responsibility" that have no experience (not their fault, but a little research does go a long way - we all started somewhere).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<PRE>
So I would suggest that in the IPv6 world that is coming (slowly :-)
dropping email based solely on a lack of PTR record is a
business-damaging, community-damaging, customer-damaging, user-damaging
</PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<BR>
If they have not learnt from IPv4 days, there is little hope now.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>