Yakov Shafranovich wrote:
Some DNSRBLs work on policy level - listing ISPs that support spammers,
listing modem pools, etc. What do we do about them?
I don't see there's an issue with those w.r.t. the DNSBL BCP.
As Matt suggests, tho with a less emotionally loaded/simpler example: if
your mission is to list DHCP dialup pools, and a particular IP really
_is_ a DHCP dialup pool, there is no collateral damage or false
positives by definition.
From the filter operator's perspective, if they use a dialup pool
blacklist they're making a policy decision to block dialup pools, not
necessarily spam per-se. As such the only FP is when the IP is
erroneously listed as dialup.
Yes, blocking dialup pools is an effective anti-spam measure. But in
order to operate without grey areas, the MTA operator (not the DNSBL
operator) needs to couch it as a dialup block, not a spam block.
This is particularly important with our open relay/proxy blacklisting -
our policy is simple: we don't accept email from systems that are open
proxies or open relays, period. Prevents arguments like "but only 99%
of the stuff coming from my IP is spam! Unblock me!".
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg