I nor anybody pretended they talked about PTR-based filtering.
Len, you started this entire thread with quotes from the article and then "So ASTA members are suffering as much as the rest of us, and their recommendatin is to block networks that spew spam and infections from subscribe IPs direct to our MXs. Where have we heard this before? For those of you who refuse (or are technically unable ) to block subscriber networks by PTR hostname ..."
So where did I say ASTA talked about PTR filtering?
PTR filtering is my recommendation on how to implement ASTA's punitive ISP/network blocking.
ASTA's current position paper is just plain _irrelevant_ to your ruleset
Pure BS. blocking networks by PTR (or any other method) is perfectly coherent with the ASTA position.
No, Len. As we keep saying, it is not.
Explain why not. (and I'm still waiting for you to document your 15%, so it's self-serving FUD until you do. btw, ASTA has no qualms about blocking innocent IPs on an offending ISP/network. )
ASTA recommends blocking ISP networks that are insecured, spewing. Blocking by PTR hostname is perfectly consistent with that recommendation.
Saying it does not make it true. ASTA believes in being "A Good Neighbor" their words).
The subscriber network "neighborhood" is already a disaster zone spewing abuse all over the planet. And you still want to pretend that Internet is a bunch of "neighborly" "professionals" acting in goodwill who will a) accept/acknowledge complaints b) act to stop the abuse? GMAFB
They say nothing about picking and choosing which ISP customers to block.
And neither do I. Obviously, their blanket blocking of an offending ISP/network is not concerned about collateral damage to innocents therein. In fact, the power of blocking comes from the (financial) pain applied to the offender.
based on misinformation (reverse DNS entries).
Since when is a PTR hostname "mis"information? They publish PTR records, why would anybody consider the PTR records to be misinformation?
They are professionals, and would follow a professional strategy
would they now? Sounds to me like their "gauntlet throwing" is professional warriors hauling out the heavy artillery, while your weaselly spin sounds like Scott's Tea Party in Wonderland.
, such as [1] Contacting the ISP
That's more completely insane cost shifting onto the victims of spew.
Nobody has time to contact ISPs or huge corps running huge networks. And you know darn well that obtaining just a response (forget about seeing an action resulting from a contact) is a waste of time. They spew, they get blocked, period. This is very clealy ASTA position.
As victims, it's not our $role to $contact the perpetrators. The whole point and objective is that the networks operators pre-empt abuse of we victims by policing their own networks and clients. The network operators must know (and care) that their networks are spewing BEFORE we victims have to waste our money trying to have a dialogue with them.
We police, set policies, for our MXs and our networks, end of our responsibility and expense. Who will waste their time and money asking, with more months of patience, the perpetrators to pretty please stop what has been going on for years?
ASTA is addressing a very old, huge, Internet-threatening problem arising from the absence of "professionalism" and "neighborliness". Network operators who allow horrendous spew from their networks are not professional or neighborly (nor ignorant of the spew and nor just waiting for enlightenment from us the victims).
and letting them know the blocking will occur if they do not fix the problem after X months
months? Way too long. And anyway, the "months" have passed, the volume of spew from subscriber networks world-wide has been constant and is increasing weekly. The network operators/ISP have exhausted any good will they might deserve from our neighborly inclininations.
You're sillily spinning on about some multi-month, expensive-for-the-victim pre-blocking multi-step process (which everyone knows is useless, fruitless), while the ASTA position is "throwing down the gauntlet", "secure your networks or be blocked".
, [2] if those months go by
"if"??? You're talking again about some fantasyland. The months have gone by long ago, the problem is getting worse.
contact the ISP and let them know the block is going to occur
At this very late stage, the ONLY effective way to signal to the perpetrators is to block them.
and give the ISP the option of submitting dynamic IPs, [3] blocking just those dynamic IPs (unless problems are occurring with static IPs or the ISP mailservers as well).
your 1,2,3 steps are pure fantasyland and a waste of time. It might make sense if Internet were a neighborly club of good-willed, professional citizens, but it's not, so it's stupid to pretend it is.
Quote from ASTA press release:
"The zombie problem, said representatives of the group, is going largely UNCHECKED because other Internet providers ARE NOT TAKING SUCH ACTION."
They don't take a shotgun approach of "It's a ghetto! Let's block 'em all! Even the fire department!"
Sure they do. They refer to blocking an ISP, ALL it IPs, including the outbound MTAs for spewing abuse and for not securing their networks.
The two main problems with the current approach are that [1] lots of static IPs get mixed in with the dynamic IPs
Spewing static IPs are mixed in with spewing dynamic IPs.
"The proposal suggests that Internet providers that are quarantining zombies might REJECT __ALL MAIL__ FROM NETWORKS that are not doing so."
Having a static IP doesn't indicate or prove the machine on the static IP is innocent, "professional", "neighborly", "trustable", "merits the benefit of the doubt".
btw, ASTA's entire position is obviously punitive (you're network's insecure, we punish you by blocking). But my position is primarily defensive of my MXs. If my defensive MX policies, as a secondary effect, punish the blocked networks, so be it. That's their problem (and their time + cost), not mine.
Len
_____________________________________________________________________ http://MenAndMice.com/DNS-training : Denver; NYC; San Jose http://IMGate.MEIway.com : free anti-spam gateway, runs on 1000's of sites
To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
