[AusNOG] IPv6 reverse DNS and Mail ...

[David Miller]

On 05/20/2013 10:38 AM, Shane Short wrote:
> On 20/05/2013, at 6:04 PM, Noel Butler <noel.butler at ausics.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2013-05-20 at 16:28 +1000, Reuben Farrelly wrote:
>>
>>
>>> "They don't have a PTR record" isn't an explanation that will cut it to 
>>> non IT people, generally, and after the blank look has subsided you'll 
>> "Sorry,  but we see that X has failed one of our many anti spam measures so was rejected" - That's good enough. It's been good enough for past near 20 years, fail to see why WE should change, just to appease lazy system admins, if they can't do their job properly, maybe their employers should know, so they can be replaced by someone who will do the job properly.
>>
> Not to call anyone out in particular, the general contempt some sysadmins show for their users is phenomenal-- sometimes I think people forget why we have these networks in place. We run these networks to service a customer or business need, not to give you toys to play with during the day.

We do run these networks to satisfy business needs, and one of the
business requirements passed to 'us' from the 'users' is that they would
like less spam.

>
> If the customer isn't getting their mail, you're not doing your job. You can't dismiss the person with "oh the other end is doing something I don't like so I'm rejecting their email"

You are looking at this from the wrong perspective.  If the commonly
accepted requirement for reverse DNS is a huge detriment to message
flow, then this is a business opportunity.  You should setup an email
service without this constraint and corner the market for email services.

>
> So what if someone on the other end of the world haven't set up rDNS properly on a box? Google don't set up any rDNS on much of their network infrastructure, which bothers me, shall I blackhole their traffic? I bet that'd last a whole 30 seconds before someone bitches me out.
>
> -Shane.
>
-DMM