On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 10:43:55PM -0500, David Maxwell wrote:
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?
Is is not generally agreed upon.
With the possibility of SRV records my prediction is that you won't
recognize any measureable difference, but during the time it takes for
ISPs around the Internet to shut port 25 down, cause they have to talk
to their customers to not block their "legal" MTAs (and I would sue my
ISP to ashed if they'd do it without informing me) there would be a
migration to SRV records to circumvent the blockage.
On the flip side, with regard to anyone who didn't want their network
filtered... "what are they afraid of"?
From next week on each and every motion of you will be tracked by
tracking the signals of you handy, so that one can make a profile.
Of course this will only be done if you are suspected to have robbed a
bank. If you don't rob banks, ""what are you 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...
You have to manage huge lists of expections to port 25 filters. We're
not talking about 10 but 10000 customers. A lot of the are companies
with their own MTAs. Believe me you don't want to manage that lists in
your border routers.
\Maex
--
SpaceNet AG | Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Fon: +49 (89) 32356-0
Research & Development | D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299
"The security, stability and reliability of a computer system is reciprocally
proportional to the amount of vacuity between the ears of the admin"
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg