On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 10:43:27PM +0100, Markus Stumpf wrote:
Hoi Alan,
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 10:58:21AM -0500, Alan DeKok wrote:
We cannot start blocking ports as we like. We can't even block spamming
hosts on our customer mailstores - unless they serverly damage operating
of that mailstores.
Then your AUP and/or contracts need to change.
No. It's just like if you are living in a country like the USA or
Germany or a lot of other states you are free to go wherever you want.
If you fail to adhere to the agreed upon social system you get busted.
One simple question...
If it was generally agreed that port 25 filtering would significantly
reduce spam, then wouldn't it make sense for people to agree to have
that filtering applied to their network, in order to cooperate for the
greater good?
On the flip side, with regard to anyone who didn't want their network
filtered... "what are they afraid of"?
You clearly don't need to filter port 25 from the entire customer
network - just from everything but their MTA. If any customer refuses,
please publish their netmask, so we can block traffic from such
irresponsible netizens...
--
David Maxwell, david(_at_)vex(_dot_)net|david(_at_)maxwell(_dot_)net -->
Any sufficiently advanced Common Sense will seem like magic...
- me
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg