Re: NEVER USE SORBS - Debian

This is a discussion on Re: NEVER USE SORBS - Debian ; Hey Craig I think the business-ADSL space is changing a lot and expectations are rising for what can be achieved with a business ADSL line. I rent a business level ADSL line here in Italy because it's convenient for me ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 117

Thread: Re: NEVER USE SORBS

  1. RE: NEVER USE SORBS

    Hey Craig

    I think the business-ADSL space is changing a lot and expectations are
    rising for what can be achieved with a business ADSL line.

    I rent a business level ADSL line here in Italy because it's convenient
    for me especially because competition has lowered prices to the point
    where for example 6 Mbit ADSL with no upload/download limits (which on
    the contrary is common back home in Australia) costs of the order of 50
    AUD a month flat. I got the business level ADSL instead of the consumer
    level ADSL precisely because it offered a static IP address, that indeed
    has not changed in all the years that I have had the service, regardless
    of reboots. But, importantly, it is assigned by DHCP, presumably for
    the convenience of the customer in not having to be a master at
    configuring their network equipment, just simply plug in and follow the
    standard instructions on the consumer-level ADSL modem. The ADSL
    connection is of a high quality by what I can judge: it often remains
    connected for months at a time, until usually I bring it down by
    restarting something, not the ISP.

    Having that sort of convenience means that I can put all sorts of
    machines and servers behind NAT and being a software developer I
    actually do do so.

    Now the ISP I use is one of the biggest European-wide ISP's, and I am
    pretty certain that for me it would be very difficult bureaucratically
    to get them to do anything like configure an rDNS or raise or lower
    TTL's and so on. So, I haven't tried. And my servers and SSH and VPN
    connections work fine.

    Except for mail.

    I haven't set up a mail server simply because I am terrified of the pain
    I would go through judging by what I read on this group. Now being an
    old (literally) software engineer who is reasonably competent in many
    things computer-wise after 30 years of studying compsci and then working
    with all manner of hardware and software, I would actually like to
    eventually set up my own mail server. And I would like to do it without
    coordinating with my ISP because of all the pain I would go through. I
    would like to do it with the same competence that I've set up my (not
    public so far) web server and my firewall, and every other thing I've
    had to go through in learning about connecting server equipment to the
    internet.

    But you're saying that the one type of server I shouldn't connect is a
    mail server? Because I couldn't cope? I don't think that's reasonable.
    I understand that you may not want to accept mail directly from me
    because of arbitrary rules like you wouldn't accept mail from someone
    born in Australia but living in Italy, but I don't think it is
    reasonable for all the mail admins in the world to not accept my mail
    because it is assigned from a pool of addresses for all I know may be
    designated somewhere as being dynamic (my bet is that they are: what
    does 217-133-15-nnn.b2b.tiscali.it say as an IP address to you?).

    I for one would like to know how to become professionally competent in
    mail server administration, slowly, at my own pace, gradually
    introducing more and more complexity as time goes on, just as I did with
    apache etc. I expect to be capable of doing this judging by other
    things I have learnt in the past. I may make mistakes, I may not
    designate some header fields correctly in my first attempts, but I would
    hate to be banned from trying simply because I was blacklisted by SORBS.
    But I certainly would never send SPAM, I am too professional and careful
    for that. In fact, I would argue that learning at my own pace on my
    ADSL would be far preferable than learning in the sysadmin group of some
    organisation with a network connection that is truly static.

    But you're saying that even if I succeed in becoming a competent mail
    admin, I shouldn't join the peer-to-peer world of mail servers simply
    because I have this IP address? And if my netblock (because of some
    other IP address in it generating spam) gets blacklisted by SORBS I can
    say bye-bye to sending mail because of the difficuly I would have in
    getting my ISP to change anything? [In fact, by the way, I think that
    this netblock is on some blacklist somewhere, because a lot of my mail
    sent via the ISP's SMTP server smtp.tiscalinet.it (like this posting)
    doesn't arrive at the destination in Australia (it only happens with
    Australia and AOL, is that because SORBS is there?), it just ends up in
    a black hole because I don't get anything in return either.]

    Peter K.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Peter Klavins Datalon SrL
    klavins@netspace.net.au Viale Giuseppe Mazzini 114/A
    Mobile +39 339 801 4246 Fax +39 06 233 297 037 00195 Roma RM Italy

    -----Original Message-----
    From: CaT [mailto:cat@zip.com.au]
    Sent: Thursday, 27 July 2006 2:11 PM
    To: Craig Sanders
    Cc: debian-isp@lists.debian.org
    Subject: Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 07:38:14PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
    > On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 04:00:15PM +1000, CaT wrote:
    > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 03:33:13PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
    > > > well then, you finally figured out how to get mail working correctly
    > > > from a dynamic IP address - use a smarthost. preferably one under your
    > > > own control.

    > >
    > > Wow. And here I thought an IP address was an IP address, each as capable
    > > as the other of being an IP address.

    >
    > just shows how wrong you can be, doesnt it?


    Please feel free to kill the attitude at any time. If you have something
    to say, say it without the spittle.

    > the fact that it is technically possible to run a mail server on a
    > dynamic ip address doesnt mean that it is practical to do so. even


    Depends on the purpose you're going to put it to.

    > aside from DULs making it difficult to send mail directly with any
    > reliability, it is actually impossible to reliably receive mail via smtp


    I think you're confusing dynamic IPs with your desire to deny people
    behind them the ability to send mail out of servers running behind them.
    There is nothing about a dynamic IP that makes outgoing mail unreliable,
    the peculiar attitude of some people aside.

    > direct to a dynamic IP - dynamic dns just doesnt cut it for MX records


    That's neither here nor there and not at all relevant.

    > similarly, you cant reliably run a web server or any other kind of
    > server on a dynamic IP address.


    This too is neither here nor there and not at all relevant (nor 100%
    accurate).

    > something that only works sometimes may be acceptable for a home user
    > that doesnt reaaly care that much, but they should just accept the fact
    > that they're only paying for a "best effort" level of service and quit
    > whinging about the fact that nobody cares any more than they do (and
    > probably considerably less).


    Nobody? I think you're giving your personal opinion more weight then it
    may necessarily have.

    --
    "To the extent that we overreact, we proffer the terrorists the
    greatest tribute."
    - High Court Judge Michael Kirby


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  2. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On 27.07.06 12:51, Craig Sanders wrote:
    > i wouldn't ever use spamcop - their automation is broken to the point
    > of being moronic. i've seen way too many legitimate mailing lists end
    > up blocked by them because some idiot (who *DID* subscribe in the first
    > place) is too lazy to read & follow the how-to-unsub instructions at the
    > bottom of each message.


    According to my personal experince, SpamCop has grown out of his childish
    weaknesses and currently is one of fastest and most effective blocking lists.

    e.g. SpamCop can currently detect clients spamming through our mailservers
    and report/list the clients, not us. It's also fast by delisting, after
    solving problem the host can be delisted in very short time.

    Of course, scoring techniques have better false-positives rate, OTOH they do
    not force listed hosts to take care of the problem, which is very important
    for solving spam problems.
    --
    Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
    Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
    Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
    A day without sunshine is like, night.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  3. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    > On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 07:38:14PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
    > > aside from DULs making it difficult to send mail directly with any
    > > reliability, it is actually impossible to reliably receive mail via smtp


    On 27.07.06 22:10, CaT wrote:
    > I think you're confusing dynamic IPs with your desire to deny people
    > behind them the ability to send mail out of servers running behind them.
    > There is nothing about a dynamic IP that makes outgoing mail unreliable,
    > the peculiar attitude of some people aside.


    There is ont thing that makes spam detection of mail coming from dynamic IP
    address less reliable. Static address can be listed in any BL list, and
    independantly on use of that list (for scoring or filtering), this can not
    be done with dynamic IP addresses.

    So, because of this reason, many admins decided to refuse e-mail from remote
    dial-up addresses, using SORBS DUHL, NJABL DYNABLOCK, MAP DUL or whatever.

    All of them are just and only lists, evidences of dynamically assigned
    addresses. They do not indicate mail received from them is spam.
    However people use to block mail from them and it gives them very high
    success rate in spam hunting.

    --
    Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
    Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
    Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
    Save the whales. Collect the whole set.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  4. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On 27.07.06 15:03, Peter Klavins wrote:
    > I rent a business level ADSL line here in Italy because it's convenient
    > for me especially because competition has lowered prices to the point
    > where for example 6 Mbit ADSL with no upload/download limits (which on
    > the contrary is common back home in Australia) costs of the order of 50
    > AUD a month flat. I got the business level ADSL instead of the consumer
    > level ADSL precisely because it offered a static IP address, that indeed
    > has not changed in all the years that I have had the service, regardless
    > of reboots. But, importantly, it is assigned by DHCP, presumably for
    > the convenience of the customer in not having to be a master at
    > configuring their network equipment, just simply plug in and follow the
    > standard instructions on the consumer-level ADSL modem.


    Having/using DHCP does NOT mean that you adress is dynamic. Even with DHCP,
    on dialup or aDSL links you CAN have statically assigned address that is
    always assigned to you, and only to you.

    > But you're saying that the one type of server I shouldn't connect is a
    > mail server? Because I couldn't cope? I don't think that's reasonable.
    > I understand that you may not want to accept mail directly from me
    > because of arbitrary rules like you wouldn't accept mail from someone
    > born in Australia but living in Italy, but I don't think it is
    > reasonable for all the mail admins in the world to not accept my mail
    > because it is assigned from a pool of addresses for all I know may be
    > designated somewhere as being dynamic (my bet is that they are: what
    > does 217-133-15-nnn.b2b.tiscali.it say as an IP address to you?).


    He's saying, that if address is dynamically assigned, it is (will be) listed
    in dynamic address lists (SORBS, NJABL and MAPS do have such lists) and
    remote mailservers will often refuse getting mail from you.

    Also, if you will try to receive mail at dynamic address, your link may
    break, the address can be assigned to someone else, and if there will be
    running SMTP server, it will probably reject mail for your domain, send
    notices about non-existing address(es) or someone else may get to the mail
    and read it.

    Why don't you ask your ISP for statically assigned address, if you want to
    send/receive mail there? They will probably give you IP from another pool
    that is not listed in such lists and you won't have any of problems
    mentioned above.

    --
    Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
    Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
    Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
    I just got lost in thought. It was unfamiliar territory.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  5. RE: NEVER USE SORBS

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Craig Sanders [mailto:cas@taz.net.au]
    > Sent: 27 July 2006 10:56
    > To: debian-isp@lists.debian.org
    > Subject: Re: NEVER USE SORBS
    >
    > On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 11:40:08PM -0700, Steve Redlich wrote:
    > > On Thu, 27 Jul 2006, Craig Sanders wrote:
    > >
    > > >>http://www.us.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?63.193.144.218 (captcha required)
    > > >>
    > > >> Dynamic IP Space (LAN, Cable, DSL & Dial Ups)
    > > >>Netblock: 63.193.144.0/21 (63.193.144.0-63.193.151.255)
    > > >>Record Created: Mon Jul 3 13:53:03 2006 GMT
    > > >>Record Updated: Thu Jul 20 03:38:13 2006 GMT
    > > >>Additional Information: This netblock was removed/delisted, future
    > > >>listings will supersede this entry.
    > > >>Currently inactive and not flagged to be published in

    > DNS.


    Looks like that IP is also listed by http://block.blars.org/
    For exactly the same reason. I would also have considered that would be a
    dynamic ip address by the domain and the way its is done.

    Who else would not ?

    host 63.193.144.218
    218.144.193.63.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer
    adsl-63-193-144-218.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net.

    Many people have shouted lots at SBORBS so far on this list.
    But at least they are trying actively to fix a problem that needs to be
    fixed. Like a few other people are trying todo using dnsbl and spf and some
    other methods.

    Until the spam problem is fixed the likes of sorbs will always exist. Its
    rules are 99% ok for using except for the dynamic IP listings. These don't
    seem to make sense because I don't think its possible to get a whole list of
    IP that are static and not.

    Some people have mentioned sueing and that sorbs is breaking the law ?
    Could somebody who has made one of these statement please explain how ?





    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  6. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Thu, 27 Jul 2006, Craig Sanders wrote:

    >>> how is this proof that sorbs 'throws the baby out with the bathwater'?

    >>
    >> The added a /21 of static IPs probably because some Windows Loser doesn't
    >> know how to keep their machine virus free.

    >
    > no, they added it because the dns records indicated that it was probably
    > dynamic. probably triggered by virus or spam as you suggest.
    >
    > they de-listed it when shown evidence by the owner that it was
    > statically allocated.
    >
    > so...what, exactly, is your problem with this scenario? looks like the
    > DUL working exactly as designed and exactly as documented.


    You asked for proof of the baby being thrown out with the bath water.

    I provided one. A /21 listed as being dynamic and then being delisted 17
    days later because it was really static. (and from the ARIN rwhois - NON
    PORTABLE)

    SORBS caused a problem for others and refused to quickly fix it.

    DUHL is supposed to be a list of dynamic addresses, if an address is
    clearly not dynamic it should quickly be removed from the list.

    http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?...everedlich.com

    Shows a domain at this IP for over four years. My Colo Box doesn't even
    pass this test. That hosting company moved to a different datacenter a
    year +1/2 ago.

    Even if my IP was hosting spam services and sending spam, it would
    belong in the spammers rbl. not the dynamic rbl.

    It's clearly non-dynamic. It doesn't belong on a dynamic list.

    SORBS DUHL lists both dynamic and static IP addresses. They ignore
    notifications of listing errors. QED

    It should be clear by now. Don't use SORBS.

    Steve


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  7. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 03:00:23PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
    > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 07:38:14PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
    > > > aside from DULs making it difficult to send mail directly with any
    > > > reliability, it is actually impossible to reliably receive mail via smtp

    >
    > On 27.07.06 22:10, CaT wrote:
    > > I think you're confusing dynamic IPs with your desire to deny people
    > > behind them the ability to send mail out of servers running behind them.
    > > There is nothing about a dynamic IP that makes outgoing mail unreliable,
    > > the peculiar attitude of some people aside.

    >
    > There is ont thing that makes spam detection of mail coming from dynamic IP
    > address less reliable. Static address can be listed in any BL list, and


    This seems to contradict your statement below (that being 'All of them
    are just and only lists, evidences of dynamically assigned addresses.
    They do not indicate mail received from them is spam'). If that statement
    is true (and, IMO, it is) then an IP being dynamic does not hinder in
    the detection of spam.

    > independantly on use of that list (for scoring or filtering), this can not
    > be done with dynamic IP addresses.


    Fatal flaw with blacklists. In the end you wind up shooting the innocent.

    > So, because of this reason, many admins decided to refuse e-mail from remote
    > dial-up addresses, using SORBS DUHL, NJABL DYNABLOCK, MAP DUL or whatever.


    I... well lets just say I find it difficult to abide by the use of
    nuclear weapons.

    > All of them are just and only lists, evidences of dynamically assigned


    They are neither just nor unjust. They are lists. The use they are put
    to and the care with which they are maintained can be just or unjust.
    IMO the use they are put to is unjust as they are utilised to punish
    those who have done no wrong.

    > addresses. They do not indicate mail received from them is spam.


    Correct.

    > However people use to block mail from them and it gives them very high
    > success rate in spam hunting.


    As someone who receives well over 1000 pieces of spam a day I find the
    above does not make their use in the manner spacified as just.

    --
    "To the extent that we overreact, we proffer the terrorists the
    greatest tribute."
    - High Court Judge Michael Kirby


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  8. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 03:03:06PM +0200, Peter Klavins wrote:
    > Now the ISP I use is one of the biggest European-wide ISP's, and I am
    > pretty certain that for me it would be very difficult bureaucratically
    > to get them to do anything like configure an rDNS or raise or lower
    > TTL's and so on. So, I haven't tried. And my servers and SSH and VPN
    > connections work fine.


    I think the problem in your case is mostly that Tiscali does not bother to
    document properly publically your block. It is too big and too uncaring as
    company to follow best practices in network management. I have in the past
    had a lot of trouble with spam originating from the Tiscali network and
    apparently so have many others. I would not even be surprised to find
    Tiscali on a lot of local custom blacklists (though I have not blacklisted
    it).

    I understand that from your perspective Tiscali's business ADSL is ok and it
    may even be the only reasonably priced solution in some parts of Europe. The
    problem from for example my point of view is that I have only your word
    about the nature of you connection. To the whole world it looks like just
    some generic desktop addresses somewhere. If Tiscali bothered to tell Sorbs
    officially about their address space, you would not have this problem. Also
    if they bothered to properly acknowledge your authority about the address by
    setting a real reverse name (or even better your own delegation), you would
    not have any problems. The problem with large ADSL providers often is that
    they do not care to follow best practices.

    > Except for mail.


    Mail is different than the rest of the services because with most other
    services there is much less chance of misuse. A web server on a dynamic
    address is rarely causing any damage to anyone else and a ssh server will
    rarely flood to other people's servers (though ssh brute force attacks used
    by spammers are starting to get there).

    But mail sent from hacked desktops and such is actually causing people a lot
    of problems. That is why it is starting to be important to filter outgoing
    email at smarthosts. If the spam is accepted from any address, it can only
    be filtered when it has already been delivered across the net. And my
    personal DUHL-check blocks upto several hundreds of spams per day.

    > But you're saying that the one type of server I shouldn't connect is a
    > mail server? Because I couldn't cope?


    No, not because you could not but because the receiver can not distinguish
    you from a spammer or a trojan.

    I agree that relying on reverse names and such issues to distinguish
    properly maintained email servers from infected hosts is a really bad
    "hack", but it is currently one of the very few hacks we have. And it works
    most of the time.

    I suppose a nicer way to prevent false positives would be to have a dns
    whitelist of known trustworthy mail hosts. But maintaining such a list has
    so far been too difficult. (Though I have some ideas that I plan to
    experiment with.)

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFEyMUARGhQc/k/gTsRAl+zAJ9JieyRE4QqPsM+Web7MonG1tZJCACgrEd/
    JblIfuBfUsZcixDr52Klqcc=
    =57D6
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  9. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 13:09:28 +0300, Boris Pavlov
    wrote:

    > that's why they seem to you "whinning". and that's why
    > you surely are unnesessary rude to them.


    If I was in a chronic bad mood, I would seek medical help.

  10. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 06:03:15AM -0700, Steve Redlich wrote:
    > You asked for proof of the baby being thrown out with the bath water.
    > I provided one. A /21 listed as being dynamic and then being delisted 17
    > days later because it was really static. (and from the ARIN rwhois - NON
    > PORTABLE)


    Please stop spreading this disinformation about non-portable addresses.
    I _already_ explained this issue to you a few weeks ago, but I will restate
    it for the benefit of those who have not already been told this:

    NON-PORTABLE addresses have _absolutely_ _nothing_ to do with dynamic or
    static addresses. If an address block is PORTABLE, you can take the
    addresses with you when you change ISP. If the address block is
    NON-PORTABLE, your ISP owns the addresses and gets to take them back when
    you change to another ISP.

    If you used this portability argument to Sorbs then no wonder it took time.
    I hope people do not start claiming that Sorbs lists portable addresses.

    > It's clearly non-dynamic. It doesn't belong on a dynamic list.
    > SORBS DUHL lists both dynamic and static IP addresses. They ignore
    > notifications of listing errors. QED


    63.193.144.218 not RBL filtered by dul.dnsbl.sorbs.net

    So you have kindly given an example that Sorbs actually delists people
    (even though your reverse still looks like a dynamic one). I do not see what
    the fuss is about.


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFEyMpLRGhQc/k/gTsRAjyFAKCDIfQNrpE+Jvip4kv7xiwvjIYeEgCgoiBh
    Ts0t5u3wI6qGa6XpKbSrcpE=
    =j2Ch
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  11. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    > On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 03:00:23PM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
    > > There is ont thing that makes spam detection of mail coming from dynamic IP
    > > address less reliable. Static address can be listed in any BL list, and


    On 27.07.06 23:47, CaT wrote:
    > This seems to contradict your statement below (that being 'All of them
    > are just and only lists, evidences of dynamically assigned addresses.
    > They do not indicate mail received from them is spam'). If that statement
    > is true (and, IMO, it is) then an IP being dynamic does not hinder in
    > the detection of spam.


    I don't think those statements are opposite... being listed in dynamic host
    list doesn't mean that you are spammer, it only means you have dynamically
    assigned address. However, most of mail received from such addresses are
    spams. And that is the reason why admins use such lists.

    > > independantly on use of that list (for scoring or filtering), this can
    > > not be done with dynamic IP addresses.

    >
    > Fatal flaw with blacklists. In the end you wind up shooting the innocent.


    as I said, it does not matter whether server uses scoring or filtering. Even
    if server uses scoring technology - listing dynamic addresses in classical
    spam RBL's is very ineffective, because spammer will reconnect and starts
    spamming from different IP.

    So, we could end up with all dynamic addresses listed. I think It's much
    safer to list all dynamic addresses in different list, and let admins decide
    what to do with it.

    eh... $.02 ?
    --
    Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
    Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
    Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
    I wonder how much deeper the ocean would be without sponges.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  12. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    Hey Peter,

    Peter Klavins wrote:
    > I think the business-ADSL space is changing a lot and expectations are
    > rising for what can be achieved with a business ADSL line.


    In Australia, the reality is that residential grade ADSL is often no less
    good than business grade and is usually a whole lot cheaper.

    > I rent a business level ADSL line here in Italy because it's
    > convenient
    > for me especially because competition has lowered prices to the point
    > where for example 6 Mbit ADSL with no upload/download limits (which on
    > the contrary is common back home in Australia) costs of the order of
    > 50 AUD a month flat. I got the business level ADSL instead of the
    > consumer level ADSL precisely because it offered a static IP address,
    > that indeed has not changed in all the years that I have had the service,
    > regardless of reboots. But, importantly, it is assigned by DHCP,
    > presumably for
    > the convenience of the customer in not having to be a master at
    > configuring their network equipment, just simply plug in and follow
    > the standard instructions on the consumer-level ADSL modem. The ADSL
    > connection is of a high quality by what I can judge: it often remains
    > connected for months at a time, until usually I bring it down by
    > restarting something, not the ISP.


    You may be surprised to know that Exetel offer business here a service
    almost the same as you describe:
    - static IP [similarly setup]
    - $AUD50 per month
    - 6mbps/640kbps [ADSL1 Enhanced]
    - Unlimited data 7am to 7pm Monday to Friday and $AUD1 per GB outside of
    these times.

    > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > Peter Klavins Datalon SrL
    > klavins@netspace.net.au Viale Giuseppe Mazzini 114/A
    > Mobile +39 339 801 4246 Fax +39 06 233 297 037 00195 Roma RM Italy


    btw a mail server on ADSL is not so much different to one on ISDN, but ADSL
    is available with much faster speeds.

    Kind Regards

    AndrewM

    Andrew McGlashan
    Broadband Solutions now including VoIP 1300 85 3804

    Mobile: 04 2574 1827 Fax: 03 8790 1224

    Affinity Vision Australia Pty Ltd
    www.affinityvision.com.au
    www.affinityvision.net/adsl/

    In Case of Emergency -- http://www.affinityvision.com.au/ice.html


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  13. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 23:42 +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote:

    >
    > btw a mail server on ADSL is not so much different to one on ISDN, but ADSL
    > is available with much faster speeds.


    Except that ISDN is a guaranteed service and ADSL is a best effort.

    Shane


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  14. was: Re: NEVER USE SORBS now: ISDN unintentional comedy


    On Thu, 27 Jul 2006, Shane Chrisp wrote:

    [snip]
    > Except that ISDN is a guaranteed service and ADSL is a best effort.


    "ISDN is a guaranteed service" - thats one of the funniest things I have
    ever read. The only thing guaranteed about ISDN (IMHO and speaking only
    from US experience) is that it is guaranteed to not work very well and
    [insert telco here] will screw up the billing


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  15. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 00:59 +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote:
    > Shane Chrisp wrote:
    > > Except that ISDN is a guaranteed service and ADSL is a best effort.

    >
    > I had a hard drive fail on my firewall machine that connects my ADSL, so far
    > no drop outs whatsoever since replacing the HDD:
    > 11d 22h 3m 14s
    >
    > There is nothing wrong with using ADSL for servers and it is getting better
    > all the time.


    Im not saying that adsl isnt reliable, just that there is no guarantee
    within aus, as you would already know. If the service goes out, it could
    be out for many days as it gets a lower priority than voice, frame, atm,
    isdn, emergency, gprs, gsm etc etc. Ive also had uptimes on my home adsl
    of 60+ days, but i dont, and wouldnt run a mail server on it, even
    though i chose the current adsl provider because they set thier rdns in
    a suitable manner for the static ip customers.

    Shane


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  16. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    Shane Chrisp wrote:
    > Except that ISDN is a guaranteed service and ADSL is a best effort.


    I had a hard drive fail on my firewall machine that connects my ADSL, so far
    no drop outs whatsoever since replacing the HDD:
    11d 22h 3m 14s

    There is nothing wrong with using ADSL for servers and it is getting better
    all the time.

    AndrewM

    Andrew McGlashan
    Broadband Solutions now including VoIP 1300 85 3804

    Mobile: 04 2574 1827 Fax: 03 8790 1224

    Affinity Vision Australia Pty Ltd
    www.affinityvision.com.au
    www.affinityvision.net/adsl/

    In Case of Emergency -- http://www.affinityvision.com.au/ice.html


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  17. Re: NEVER USE SORBS



    --On July 26, 2006 9:03:36 PM -0700 Steve Redlich
    wrote:

    > On Thu, 27 Jul 2006, Craig Sanders wrote:
    >
    >>> SORBS throws the baby out with the bathwater.

    >>
    >> i keep seeing this claim, or variants of it, but i've seen no evidence
    >> whatsoever to support it.

    >
    > From
    > http://www.us.sorbs.net/lookup.shtml?63.193.144.218 (captcha required)
    >
    > Dynamic IP Space (LAN, Cable, DSL & Dial Ups)
    > Netblock: 63.193.144.0/21 (63.193.144.0-63.193.151.255)
    > Record Created: Mon Jul 3 13:53:03 2006 GMT
    > Record Updated: Thu Jul 20 03:38:13 2006 GMT
    > Additional Information: This netblock was removed/delisted, future
    > listings will supersede this entry.
    > Currently inactive and not flagged to be published in DNS.
    >
    > It two weeks for them to refuse my delisting request, then accept my
    > upstreams request for delisting. No matter what proof of a static IP an
    > end user provides besides changing rDNS, SORBS ignores it. You need an
    > AS number for them to accept an IP as static, if it doesn't meet their
    > requirements.


    You don't need an AS Number. You do need to be the contact for the IP
    Space in question, you're not. Obviously once the contact for the IP Space
    in question contacted them they were pretty quick to delist you by your own
    admission. SORBS policy in this regard I imagine is quite similar to
    everyone elses. I don't talk to random users either when getting
    statements of this is or is not a dynamic host, the spam outbreak has been
    stopped ETC. That has to come from the ISP. When I send off an abuse
    report, I don't report it to the purported sender, to some random contact
    on their website, no, you use the contact information published for the IP
    Space.

    Oh hmm interesting, states almost
    precisely this in the DUHL case, they also state they take listings from
    ISPs, not unusual for a DUHL. Now they *might* add other obviously dynamic
    hosts to this listing. In any event your IP space doesn't' have any
    sub-delegation, its part of a /12 published by SBC, IE you're not the
    contact. Get SBC to SWIP your /21 if you really are the contact for it.
    SORBS BTW mis-state because noone owns IPs. They're not property.
    ARIN/IANA/ETC have always taken that position.

    SORBS does has different policies for it's various listings, but they're
    all clearly spelled out. When I've had a listing issue I've never had an
    issue getting a listing fixed by following the procedure.


    > If it was easier to get delisted, SORBS DUHL might be OK, but as is, It's
    > a royal pain in the u-know-where to get off their list when you don't
    > belong there.


    Not if you follow their instructions. DUHL states the contact for the IP
    must contact them, no exceptions, for delisting from DUHL.

    >
    > Steve
    >
    >
    > --
    > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
    > listmaster@lists.debian.org
    >
    >
    >




    --
    Michael Loftis
    Modwest Operations Manager
    Powerful, Affordable Web Hosting


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  18. Re: NEVER USE SORBS

    also sprach Andrew McGlashan [2006.07.27.1559 +0100]:
    > There is nothing wrong with using ADSL for servers and it is
    > getting better all the time.


    This is not really a discussion for debian-isp though. Read the
    archives if you care for my opinion. And please do not repeat what's
    been said on numerous occasions in these archives. We've had this
    discussion at least 5 times that I can remember.

    --
    Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list!

    .''`. martin f. krafft
    : :' : proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info
    `. `'`
    `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system

    "literature always anticipates life.
    it does not copy it, but moulds it to its purpose.
    the nineteenth century, as we know it,
    is largely an invention of balzac."
    -- oscar wilde

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFEyOR7IgvIgzMMSnURAhvaAJ4p/P/g937bvJW1277OObt/hg6v+QCfe2qa
    Tba9poR9uwdSsalQzfJVxmE=
    =5buV
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  19. Re: NEVER USE SORBS



    --On July 27, 2006 3:00:23 PM +0200 Matus UHLAR - fantomas
    wrote:

    >> On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 07:38:14PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
    >> > aside from DULs making it difficult to send mail directly with any
    >> > reliability, it is actually impossible to reliably receive mail via
    >> > smtp

    >
    > On 27.07.06 22:10, CaT wrote:
    >> I think you're confusing dynamic IPs with your desire to deny people
    >> behind them the ability to send mail out of servers running behind them.
    >> There is nothing about a dynamic IP that makes outgoing mail unreliable,
    >> the peculiar attitude of some people aside.

    >
    > There is ont thing that makes spam detection of mail coming from dynamic
    > IP address less reliable. Static address can be listed in any BL list, and
    > independantly on use of that list (for scoring or filtering), this can not
    > be done with dynamic IP addresses.


    The other issue is that the vast majority of dynamic space is full of Mom
    and Dad and Grandma who are NOT competent and who have no clue when they
    get infected with a virust/trojan/worm spewing out Junk mail. They might
    complain their comptuer is slow and blame it on the internet being slow,
    when the reality is they're just infected. The reality is it's a form of
    'internet stereotyping.' You come from a seedy neighborhood, appear to be
    dressed kinda seedy, I'm not going to let you into my $300/night/hotel sort
    of thing unless you can prove otherwise. IT's getting almost impossibly
    expensive to handle all the junk out there, so more and more ISPs are
    filtering 'at the front door' based on lists similar to SORBS and SpamCop.
    'But you can just use it as part of SpamAssassin' that's *VERY* expensive.
    When your'e talking abotu doubling the size of an already large and
    expensive mail cluster in order to do something like that or you can just
    pretty reliably identify a BIG chunk of junk email by using certain lists.



    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  20. SPF was Re: never use sorbs



    --On July 27, 2006 1:32:06 PM +0100 James Stevenson wrote:


    > Many people have shouted lots at SBORBS so far on this list.
    > But at least they are trying actively to fix a problem that needs to be
    > fixed. Like a few other people are trying todo using dnsbl and spf and
    > some other methods.


    SPF is a dead horse. It has many very serious problems, among which are
    mailing lists don't work, forwarders also don't work and it doesn't protect
    against SPAM it just assists in helping to prove a particular mail server
    is authorized to send mail for a particular domain.



    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast