Alan Cox wrote:
> A quick test by a #linux user found that above.net's main mail
> machine appeared to relaying when fed the old <"user@domain"@domain> chestnut
I just re-ran that test (see my post on nanae). They appear to have closed
that hole. Perhaps the controversy is having a beneficial effect.
For more info on the debate, see http://www.rahul.net/dhesi/orbs.faq.txt
and/or read news:news.admin.net-abuse.email
I've been brainstorming ways to deal with this dilemma. Here's one idea:
Consider a netblock of commercial customers of an ISP, all of
which are operating their own mail hosts. The ISP requests
that ORBS not scan his netblock. ORBS lists the netblock as
"unscanned". (This is the current situation.)
Perhaps ORBS could instead list the netblock as 'unscanned but well-policed'
if no addresses in the entire netblock currently appear in MAPS.
In other words, unscanned netblocks are like coal mines, and
a MAPS listing is like a dead canary... ORBS would list for each
coal mine whether its canary was alive or dead.
Is this a reasonable way to increase the value of the information
served by ORBS, i.e. would this reduce rejection of good email?
- Dan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 15 2000 - 21:00:26 EST