On Thu, 2009-04-09 at 15:55 -0400, Neil Schwartzman wrote: > On 09/04/09 2:35 PM, "Matus UHLAR - fantomas" <uh...@fantomas.sk> wrote: > > > That's the question. I do not object against listing of a spammer, but > > dynamic? naming convention? Will they block host if it spams, if it sends > > mail from gmail com and the hostname is qw-out-1920.google.com which looks > > like their upstream provider? > > > > > > OK, I don't want to bitch, I'm searching for some valid informations, mostly > > about their "best practices". > > Well there certainly has been some discussion on the MAAWG senders' list > about naming conventions and clarity or rDNS resolution HELO, and so on and > it is something *we* recommend to our certified and safelisted clients > (beyond FQ rDSN which is a requirement), but blocking on something that is > far far far from an industry standard? I'd suggest that is silly at best, > but "do tell us how that works out for you" as the phrase goes.
I won't block on it alone, but if someone wants a whitelist entry, they have to have rDNS correct. And preferably an SPF or DKIM policy.... -- Daniel J McDonald, CCIE #2495, CISSP #78281, CNX Austin Energy http://www.austinenergy.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
