From: "Don Levey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The entity that needs to *prove* that you've got a static IP is the
*owner*
> of that IP - the ISP. That is the entity that SORBS (or other reputable
> blocking lists) will talk to about the problem. Unfortunately, they seem
to
> be uninterested in doing anything above the bare minimum needed to
maintain
> IP connectivity.
>
> Railing against the list, or the list owners, won't do anything except
piss
> people off. The reason why the list (and many others) uses SORBS is
because
> *it works*. It has been shown, over a period of years, to be reliable.
> Demanding that the list stop using SORBS would not be an efficient use of
> your time. Demanding that your ISP act like a responsible entity would be
> more useful. In my opinion, here are the things they should do:
>
> 1) Segregate dynamic IPs into one netblock, static IPs into another.
> 2) Publish/make SORBS aware of those blocks - both static and dynamic.
> 3) Make sure that the truly dynamic block does not permit outbound port 25
> access beyond their network.
> 4) As a followup to #3, this would require all dynamic IPs who want to run
> their own mail server to smarthost their outgoing mail through the ISP,
who
> can the throttle based upon load, spamminess, etc.
> 5) Respond quickly, and assertively, to spam complaints.
>
> Any guesses on how many they'll end up doing? Don't all answer at once...
> -Don
Wanna bet that does not get done? It seems the ISPs most guilty of this
problem are the same ones that seem to supply the most problem children
with regards to spam sourcing. They make too much money hosting spam and
shielding spam host dynamic addresses in among legitimate static addresses.
{o.o}
