[swinog] Anyone from Green here?
One of my customers has just been told he needs to pay to get a DNS reverse map entry for thei Green ADSL line with fixed IP. Is that really true?? /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
Marc SCHAEFER wrote: > On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:37:35AM +0200, Per Jessen wrote: >> One of my customers has just been told he needs to pay to get a DNS >> reverse map entry for thei Green ADSL line with fixed IP. >> Is that really true?? > > I had a similar query lately, and [EMAIL PROTECTED] replied that > with MPS1 (1 IP address) they won't do it, they will do it only for > MPS8 and with a delegation. That's the answer my customer got too. > > That's a pity, but it's how marketing works. It's not only very poor marketing, it's incredibly arrogant. Selling a static IP and then charging extra for the reverse mapping ... /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:37:35AM +0200, Per Jessen wrote: > One of my customers has just been told he needs to pay to get a DNS > reverse map entry for thei Green ADSL line with fixed IP. > Is that really true?? I had a similar query lately, and [EMAIL PROTECTED] replied that with MPS1 (1 IP address) they won't do it, they will do it only for MPS8 and with a delegation. That's a pity, but it's how marketing works. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
If the reverse mapping points to some valid A record, why do you need to change it? There aren't many applications that really depend on the reverse name - for most of the things it's enough that the reverse name is a valid one. - Original Message > From: Per Jessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: swinog@lists.swinog.ch > Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 11:29:04 AM > Subject: Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here? > > Marc SCHAEFER wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:37:35AM +0200, Per Jessen wrote: > >> One of my customers has just been told he needs to pay to get a DNS > >> reverse map entry for thei Green ADSL line with fixed IP. > >> Is that really true?? > > > > I had a similar query lately, and [EMAIL PROTECTED] replied that > > with MPS1 (1 IP address) they won't do it, they will do it only for > > MPS8 and with a delegation. > > That's the answer my customer got too. > > > > > That's a pity, but it's how marketing works. > > It's not only very poor marketing, it's incredibly arrogant. Selling a > static IP and then charging extra for the reverse mapping ... > > > /Per Jessen, Herrliberg > > ___ > swinog mailing list > swinog@lists.swinog.ch > http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
Hey Stan > There aren't many applications that really depend on the reverse name - > for most of the things it's enough that the reverse name is a valid one. You never tried to operate a mailserver behind a DSL-connection yet, right? :) -- Best regards, Roman Hochuli Operations Manager nexellent ag Saegereistrasse 29 CH-8152 Glattbrugg Phone: +41 44 562 30 40 Fax: +41 44 562 30 41 URL: www.nexellent.ch X-NCC-RegID: ch.nexellent Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality. -- Jules de Gaultier ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
well, I used to support customers which were running mail servers behind a broadband connection. Most spam filters and blacklists like SORBS check the reverse naming, and if it doesn't have words like cable, ppp, dynamic and such, it's quite safe to work with it. It just has to have some decent name, but the name shouldn't be necessarily customizable by the user. Anyway, who's going to send email directly from a broadband connection, instead of using the ISP's relay? :-) - Original Message > From: Roman Hochuli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 12:20:57 PM > Subject: Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here? > > Hey Stan > > > There aren't many applications that really depend on the reverse name - > > for most of the things it's enough that the reverse name is a valid one. > > You never tried to operate a mailserver behind a DSL-connection yet, > right? :) > > -- > Best regards, > Roman Hochuli > Operations Manager > > nexellent ag > Saegereistrasse 29 > CH-8152 Glattbrugg > > Phone: +41 44 562 30 40 > Fax: +41 44 562 30 41 > URL:www.nexellent.ch > X-NCC-RegID: ch.nexellent > > Imagination is the one weapon in the war > against reality. > -- Jules de Gaultier > ___ > swinog mailing list > swinog@lists.swinog.ch > http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: > Anyway, who's going to send email directly from a broadband > connection, instead of using the ISP's relay? :-) > Provided everything is properly set up, why shouldn't they? /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: > If the reverse mapping points to some valid A record, why > do you need to change it? In this case, the reverse lookup returns something like zux000-nnn-nnn.adsl.green.ch. The customer is (quite reasonably) running a mailserver on it, and would like the reverse mapping to be set up properly. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
We had asked several time green.ch for a delegation for a MPS8 and MPS16 contract - and they denied it. So submitted a list of hosts to be added to their DNS for adding PTRs. No reply, and still only the default PTR entries... Has anything changed in this since the TIC merger? -Kurt. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marc SCHAEFER Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 11:25 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here? On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:37:35AM +0200, Per Jessen wrote: > One of my customers has just been told he needs to pay to get a DNS > reverse map entry for thei Green ADSL line with fixed IP. > Is that really true?? I had a similar query lately, and [EMAIL PROTECTED] replied that with MPS1 (1 IP address) they won't do it, they will do it only for MPS8 and with a delegation. That's a pity, but it's how marketing works. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
there is at least one reason for not sending email directly: if the server IP address is added to some blacklist like SORBS, the notification is sent to the contact address of the reverse zone. If the server is under the ISP's maintenance, the ISP will (supposedly) notice this event and try its best (haha) to remove the server address from that blacklist. If the end-user's fixed IP address appears in SORBS list, the user will not notice it, and it will take much more time before it's removed. interesting, is there a business case behind? How much would one pay for a reliable and SORBS-free mail relay service? It's actually quite easy to build :) - Original Message > From: Per Jessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: swinog@lists.swinog.ch > Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 12:58:40 PM > Subject: Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here? > > Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: > > > Anyway, who's going to send email directly from a broadband > > connection, instead of using the ISP's relay? :-) > > > > Provided everything is properly set up, why shouldn't they? ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: > there is at least one reason for not sending email directly: > > if the server IP address is added to some blacklist like SORBS, > the notification is sent to the contact address of the reverse zone. > If the server is under the ISP's maintenance, the ISP > will (supposedly) notice this event and try its best (haha) to remove > the server address from that blacklist. > > If the end-user's fixed IP address appears in SORBS list, the user > will not notice it, and it will take much more time before it's > removed. I dunno - those are two big if's, and neither makes much of a reason for not sending email directly. I think it's fairly safe to say that _nobody_ is notified automagically just because an IP is added to some arbitrary blacklist. /Per Jessen, Herrliberg ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
> Marc SCHAEFER wrote: > > It's not only very poor marketing, it's incredibly arrogant. Selling a static > IP and then charging extra for the reverse mapping ... That was reason enough for me to change provider. There are other ISPs on this list which are RIPE compliant, less arrogant and more customer oriented. Daniele No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.19/1665 - Release Date: 9/10/2008 7:00 PM This e-mail, any associated files and the information contained in them are confidential and is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you have received this message in error please notify the originator and delete the email immediately. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is strictly forbidden. E-mails to and from the company are monitored for operational reasons and in accordance with lawful business practices. Any opinions expressed are those of the individual and do not necessarily represent the views of the company. The company does not conclude contracts by email and all negotiations are subject to contract. We make every effort to maintain our network free from computer viruses but accept no responsibility for any viruses which might be transferred by this e-mail. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 04:32:50AM -0700, Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: > if the server IP address is added to some blacklist like SORBS, > the notification is sent to the contact address of the reverse zone. A properly managed mail server's admin would notice that quite quickly. Infact, I(*) have been listed in ORBS or others in the last few years, usually because of an automated Mailman answer to some spam coming from a spam-trap address, and each time, it was my duty to unlist me, and sometimes ask my service provider to send a nice e-mail. I am a heavy users of those RBL lists, they offer quite a bit of protection (but not as much as you might think, and with quite a few false positives: greylisting is much more efficient). > If the server is under the ISP's maintenance, the ISP > will (supposedly) notice this event and try its best (haha) to remove > the server address from that blacklist. ... supposedly. The reason why the customer doesn't want to go through smtp.green.ch anyway is because green apparently runs a non standard Microsoft SMTP server which has the interesting property of either dropping mails silently, or, more frequently, bouncing them as spam. Contacting green support personal was replied with "it's the remote SMTP destination which refuses the mail, not us" -- although sending directly to the remote SMTP destination works. So it must be a modification made by the non standard Microsoft SMTP server which triggers the problem at the remote site, or they can't read their own logs. However, some (other) SMTP servers will refuse mail directly coming from this customer because it has reverse PTR not in the domain. The temporary workaround for this was to use yet-another-smart-host from another company, not green they have a subscription to. This works quite well, but is a bit puzzling. (*) happy net2000 (cablecom) customer, with properly set up reverse, thanks net2000. The last issue I had recently is with Yahoo delaying some of the messages sent to mailing-lists I host, I had to go through an interesting procedure during the last few months to be able to get the opportunity of maybe getting delisted, including a Privacy policy (http://www.alphanet.ch/privacy_policy.html if you are interested). ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
[swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)
Marc SCHAEFER wrote: [..] > I am a heavy users of those RBL lists, they offer quite a bit of > protection (but not as much as you might think, and with You should use RBL's only for *scoring*; not for decision making and then directly rejecting based on it. > quite a few false positives: greylisting is much more efficient). Greylisting only delays mails. Proper spammers just use ISP relays and then they will try forever. Or they will just nicely do the full SMTP thing for the first message and try again later, or stall sending to you as the 450 is recognized and spam run you again later. So many easy ways around it and it only causes annoyance. On top of that, I guess you have whitelisted large mail providers like gmail who try to send a single mail from several IP's, thus hitting your greylist over and over again, and then just giving up? :) [..] > The last issue I had recently is with Yahoo delaying some of the > messages sent to mailing-lists I host, I had to go through an > interesting procedure during the last few months to be able to > get the opportunity of maybe getting delisted, including a Privacy > policy (http://www.alphanet.ch/privacy_policy.html if you > are interested). When you send mail (or packets for that matter) to a remote site, that remote site can deny/filter/mangle those packets every way they want. As long as you are a smaller fish then them and you want to still deliver packets/mail to them you will have to comply to their rules. But as you are doing greylisting yourself, why are you complaining about another little bit of delay? ;) As always, it is your site, thus any problems you make for yourself are, well, made for yourself ;) Greets, Jeroen signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)
> Greylisting only delays mails. Proper spammers just use ISP relays and > then they will try forever. Or they will just nicely do the full SMTP > thing for the first message and try again later, or stall sending to you > as the 450 is recognized and spam run you again later. So many easy ways > around it and it only causes annoyance. I don't know anything about proper spammers. Greylisting has reduced the amount of incoming spam significantly, probably at 90-95%. Of course there are spambots which play around greylisting, but they aren't yet that widely used. > On top of that, I guess you have whitelisted large mail providers like > gmail who try to send a single mail from several IP's, thus hitting your > greylist over and over again, and then just giving up? :) some greylisting packages have their whitelists already pre-filled in the distribution package, so it works quite well (we used http://policyd.sourceforge.net/ , and I have no complaints about this software, and neither do the users. ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)
:: Greylisting only delays mails. Proper spammers just use ISP relays and Well recent analysis show that % of open proxies and botnets using fake smtp are still quite important. :: as the 450 is recognized and spam run you again later. So many easy ways :: around it and it only causes annoyance. actually I experience efficient results with ways to slow down connections to spammers. I doubt many spammers will create bots that act as real smtp gateway with the first bounce of the handshaking, doing this for 100+ or 1000+ hosts would slow down the process on their side. However never use only one technique, but cook some mixed recipes.. -- ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)
Am 11 Sep 2008 um 5:17 hat Stanislav Sinyagin geschrieben: > > Greylisting only delays mails. Proper spammers just use ISP relays and > how about registering on an page and waiting for the accept email for hours because your ISP do graylisting ? taking a relax and drink some beers till the server forwards you the expected email will lead to alcoholism ;-) Roger ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)
I think that server (coloured) lists are but an easy way out for for those who either aren't willing or able to do spam mail feature analysis. Spam is spam, even when it comes from a respectable server that has been temporarily compromised. All the up-and-coming premium spam services shy away from them, which is correct and proper. Maybe shying away from ISPs that use them would be correct and proper as well. Charles -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 3:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?) Am 11 Sep 2008 um 5:17 hat Stanislav Sinyagin geschrieben: > > Greylisting only delays mails. Proper spammers just use ISP relays and > how about registering on an page and waiting for the accept email for hours because your ISP do graylisting ? taking a relax and drink some beers till the server forwards you the expected email will lead to alcoholism ;-) Roger ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)
Jeroen Massar schrieb: > Marc SCHAEFER wrote: > [..] > >> I am a heavy users of those RBL lists, they offer quite a bit of >> protection (but not as much as you might think, and with >> > > You should use RBL's only for *scoring*; not for decision making and > then directly rejecting based on it. > > In Switzerland, you can whitelist most of the "known-good" (dynamic) IP address ranges (and important mailservers) quite easily with a mixture of the list provided by the swinog-RBL and some historic data. There rest is dealt with a few customer-support tickets. That's the beauty of Switzerland - it's so small ;-) Rainer ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)
great idea, whitelisting every system on the world which sends confirmation email .. it will be an big efford for that small country to convince the rest of the world ;-) > Jeroen Massar schrieb: > > Marc SCHAEFER wrote: > > [..] > > > >> I am a heavy users of those RBL lists, they offer quite a bit of > >> protection (but not as much as you might think, and with > >> > > > > You should use RBL's only for *scoring*; not for decision making and > > then directly rejecting based on it. > > > > > > In Switzerland, you can whitelist most of the "known-good" (dynamic) IP > address ranges (and important mailservers) quite easily with a mixture > of the list provided by the swinog-RBL and some historic data. > There rest is dealt with a few customer-support tickets. > That's the beauty of Switzerland - it's so small ;-) > > > Rainer > ___ > swinog mailing list > swinog@lists.swinog.ch > http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog > ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] Anyone from Green here?
Salut, Stanislav, On Thu, 11 Sep 2008 03:54:47 -0700 (PDT), Stanislav Sinyagin wrote: > Anyway, who's going to send email directly from a broadband > connection, instead of using the ISP's relay? :-) The case of an ISP's mail server accepting mail originating from a non-ISP address (e.g. not @tiscali.ch for tiscali, just as an example) to a non-local address is not very common as far as I can tell. That may well be a reason why one might have to do it. Alternatively, one can of course get some fully managed solution but that's not what you might want if you do special magic or don't trust anyone or have whatever other legitimate reason. Tonnerre signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)
Am 11.09.2008 um 20:28 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > great idea, > whitelisting every system on the world which sends confirmation > email .. > it will be an big efford for that small country to convince the rest > of the world > ;-) To be precise: I use dnsbl.sorbs.net to blacklist all dynamic IPs (and the RBL from spamcop, and also the swinog RBL - I would use spamhaus, but they blocked us because we make too many requests and we can't afford their prices). Then, I use the list on the SWINOG-RBL homepage to whilelist all the swiss dynamic IPs (and some other big systems, plus various IPs clients requested us to whitelist over the years) - because those are the one's that may actually want to relay through our system or send us mail legitimately. senderbase.org helps finding IPs of outbound relays, too. I don't use greylisting - IMO, it's a system that doesn't work large- scale, in a similar way TMDA or other "please reply to this email or click on this link"-systems don't work in practise. To be vaguely on topic - most of our customers have static IPs, and it's not a problem to set the PTR to another value. But we also don't boast 10+ customers, like www.green.ch does - maybe they're afraid of having to change 100k PTRs, if they set a precedent? ;-) IT would be so easy - it's just users and customers that make it difficult :-))) Rainer ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)
Stanislav Sinyagin schrieb: > I don't know anything about proper spammers. Greylisting has reduced the > amount of incoming spam significantly, probably at 90-95%. Of course there > are spambots which play around greylisting, but they aren't yet that widely > used. Agreed. For my mail system at business i have at the moment a high amount of blocked mails by greylisting, swinog list and some other RBL lists. At the beginning of this week we had a high amount of blocked mails. Reason was probably a new wave of spam bot mails. Without the blocking system our mail gateway wouldn't be able to process the load. And no we don't have any complains since months! Nor for the greylisting , nor for the RBL blocking. Adrian ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?)
actually about a year and a half ago there was a new spambot which was re-sending the message after a temporary reject. But it did it precisely in 4 minutes after the first rejection, and never tried again. So, increasing the greylisting timeout to 5 minutes has solved the problem :) - Original Message > From: Adrian Senn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 9:37:08 PM > Subject: Re: [swinog] RBL's (again) (Was: Anyone from Green here?) > > Stanislav Sinyagin schrieb: > > > I don't know anything about proper spammers. Greylisting has reduced the > > amount of incoming spam significantly, probably at 90-95%. Of course there > > are spambots which play around greylisting, but they aren't yet that widely > > used. > > Agreed. > > For my mail system at business i have at the moment a high amount of > blocked mails by greylisting, swinog list and some other RBL lists. > At the beginning of this week we had a high amount of blocked mails. > Reason was probably a new wave of spam bot mails. Without the blocking > system our mail gateway wouldn't be able to process the load. > And no we don't have any complains since months! Nor for the greylisting > , nor for the RBL blocking. > > Adrian > ___ > swinog mailing list > swinog@lists.swinog.ch > http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog ___ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
