On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 16:42:21 +0200 martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> also sprach Ryan Nowakowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.09.21.1609 > +0200]: > > I was having similar issues with some of my email recipients. Are > > you on a cable modem, dsl, or dialup? If so, you're probably > > going to have to configure exim to use your ISP's mailserver as > > a smarthost. > > We have taken the discussion up in private. The problem is in fact > the dynamic IP of the dialup, which I filter using the dynablock > RBL. It just happens that these RBL filter > 65% of all my spam > before it hits the content filters. At peak 150k mails/day this > makes the difference between a usable system and one that is DoS'ed. Unfortunately, there are many private victims for false positives of RBL-like lists, according to them, mostly due to the lack of response from our ISPs. As a matter of fact, I do have a fixed IP but that is taken out of a range of IPs mostly used for dynamic assignement. To make it worse, the ISP denies delegation of the reverse resolution. The problem is the administration of these RBL lists, which either tell you that any kind of communication with them will be published on usenet (including valid email addresses), as they presuppose that everybody in their list _is_ a spammer, or just don't give any chance to contact them. Although I can't contribute anything constructive to the above discussion, I do want to use this context to apeal these list's users, trying to convince their maintainers, that false positives do hurt people in many ways and that not being able to tell them, does'nt really help. Note: I was able to get some of my IPs out of some lists, but for a limited time only. One of the least cooperating lists seems to be spamhaus and their associates. People should really avoid them. -- Christoph Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ^X^C q quit :q ^C end x exit ZZ ^D ? help . -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]