🚀 go-pugleaf

On 9 Nov 2000 00:28:28 +1200, Nick FitzGerald <nick@virus-l.demon.co.uk> wrote:


>So you enjoy subsidizing crappy server configurations and "don't care"
>attitudes on the part of *otehr* service providers?
>
>That's nice of you, but I'd rather see my Demon fees pay for a quality
>service *at Demon*.  In today's Internet, that means rejecting mail
>from whole systems whose admins are so clueless as to be part of the
>spam problem.

In your opinion. As you already have the power to reject mail on any
grounds you like why do you want to take the risks inherent in asking
a third party to do the job for you?


>That means using services like the various MAPS lists
>and/or ORBS to reject SMTP connections.  If Demon does that, it saves
>itself and therefore its customers a whole raft of expenses it *and
>we* do not need.

It is also likely to bounce mail that is not UCE/UBE. That mail is likely
to be important. You may think that all mail originating from particular
domains (with thousands of customers/users) should be bounced. If so
you are free to do it. Just don't whinge when MAPS/ORBS lists
a domain you do need to receive mail from.

In fact, as some Demon customers have been knowm to misconfigure their
MTAs so that they operate as open relays Demon's own mail servers
have at times appeared in ORBS listings. Would you be happy not to
receive any mail from any *.demon.* address because one customer got
their sendmail configuration wrong?

>At the moment, Demon is a significant contributor to the spam problem.

Really? Evidence?

>Given its sheer size, it would only take a couple of service providers
>like Demon

Demon is small fry in customer numbers compared to uunet, aol,
freeserve...

>to enforce MAPS/ORBS type rejection of Email and the large
>service providers who not only service spammers but also many, many
>"real clients" (the uu.nets of this world) will have to do something
>more to prevent their end of the problem.i

I can see the discussion at <pick a very large US ISP> even now..

"Hey guys, a UK ISP with under 250,000 dial-ups is bouncing
our mail. Boy, are we worried".

>Imagine if someone sent you 20 postal mails a day without ever affixing
>a stamp to any of them.  After a few days to weeks of you complaining
>to the Royal Post that you were clearly being targetted by a malicious
>person and you refused delivery and payment of the missing postage
>fees, do you think the Royal POst would stop delivering those letters?

Like all analogies on usenet this one fails to make the point intended.
You have the ability to refuse to accept SMPT delivery from the punts or not
to download items if you use POP3. You also have the freedom to use another
ISP more in accord with your wishes.

>(Yes, I know it's not a perfect analogy, but I think it is close
>enough...)

You may think so.

>Maybe Peter Ceresole is happy about that, but I certainly am not.  If
>you want Demon to do something about this, CC your spam complaints to
>abuse@demon...

Who may, or may not, be pleased to receive yet more complaints that
are nothing to do with them.

Tim