On 2 Feb 2004 at 12:04, Phil Howard wrote:
On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 05:14:12PM +0100, Gustav Foseid wrote:
| Alex van den Bogaerdt <alex(_at_)ergens(_dot_)op(_dot_)het(_dot_)net>
writes:
|
| > BTW I do _not_ think an ISP is allowed to be this unresponsible. They
| > do have an obligation to "the net", the same net that allows them to
| > make money.
|
| They also have an obligation to transport the data you pay them to
| transport. Sometimes that includes data to port 25 of a random machine
| somewhere on the net.
Those obligations do not extend to the kinds of data the ISP has not agreed
to transport, such as spam or other forms of abuse.
| I could easily fins cases where blocking port 25 is a bad idea. One
| such case is users that send e-mail from a domain with "-all" in thei
| SPF record, because they should always use their company's SMTP
| server. Or you could image a company requiring use of their own SMTP
| serevr because it inserts a disclaimer or does required logging.
| (These servers would, of course, have to be authenticated SMTP
| servers.)
If SPF becomes very widely deployed, blocking port 25 won't be (as) necessary
as before. But with respect to a service issue with an ISP, the ISP can just
not offer the service of direct SMTP access for other than dedicated accounts.
The requirement should be simple. If I have my own mail server serving
my own registered domain(s) then I would qualify for having port 25
opened up only if I had a static IP address. It would not matter if
that was cable, xDSL, T1 or higher service. I would have to agree to
allow testing of my mail server.
Port 15 access would never be allowed for dial-ups and dynamic xDSLs
lines.
| If an ISP argues that such traffic should not be blocked, even from
| private customers, I would say that I agree with them.
The ISP can offer, or not offer, whatever services it wants, within the
limitations of applicable laws. I could offer services for web-only that
do not even include email at all ("you get 0 mailboxes"). Maybe there is
no market for that ... or maybe these days there is (I know of a few people
that have quit using email).
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN | http://linuxhomepage.com/ http://ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http://phil.ipal.org/ http://ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.5.txt
Wiki: http://spfwiki.infinitepenguins.net/pmwiki.php/SenderPermittedFrom/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡
----------------------------------------------------------------------
John Warren
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Any and all use of my email address for bulk email without my |
| expressed permission is prohibited. This means NO JUNK EMAIL, SPAM.|
| Support the anti-Spam amendment, Join at http://www.cauce.org/ |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.5.txt
Wiki: http://spfwiki.infinitepenguins.net/pmwiki.php/SenderPermittedFrom/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡