Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 17:26:33 -0400 From: "Gary Palmer" <gjp@in-addr.com> To: Jacques Vidrine <n@nectar.com> Cc: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Filtering port 25 (was Re: On hub.freebsd.org refusing to talk to dialups) Message-ID: <58478.938294793@noop.colo.erols.net> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 24 Sep 1999 10:24:37 CDT." <19990924152438.F0C2BBE08@gw.nectar.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jacques Vidrine wrote in message ID <19990924152438.F0C2BBE08@gw.nectar.com>: > > This prevents your customers from being something that could get you > > on the RBL or the DUL MAP for bad behavior, it also inforces the use > > of your smart host relay, as it/they is/are the only way to get a > > tcp port 25 setup completed. > > Evil! How does the ISP know I'm not running some other protocol > (which is none of its business) on port 25? Because then you be failing to follow the relevant RFCs on port assignments. > How does it know that I don't have a policy reason for accessing > some other mail server than its own? It doesn't, but direct-inject and relay-rape spam is a major problem. How do you propose that large ISPs combat abuse of their dialups to create this problem? Forcing the spam to go through their own SMTP servers, where it can be logged, tracked, rate limited and noticed much earlier is a BIG step in the right direction. UU Net is doing this for all of their resold dialups because of the major problems they had. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?58478.938294793>