In article <Pine.LNX.3.95.971125110645.13820F-100000@???>,
Evan Leibovitch <evan@???> wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Nov 1997, Greg A. Woods wrote:
>
>> Only after we put a stop to the illegal theft-of-service kind of spam
>> will a list of black-listed spammers be of any real value to those of us
>> who don't want *any* junk e-mail.
>
>OK. But even then I suggest that such a blacklist be host-based rather
>than IP-based, to consider that innocents can be sharing the same pipe as
>spammers.
The RBL concept is easily extended to be able to handle domains, hosts
and/or users if you desire...
For example:
DNS NAME NETWORK OBJECT NOTES
--------------- ------------------ ------------
paul.vix.com.mbox paul@???
paul\.vixie.vix.com.mbox paul.vixie@??? note "\."
*.vix.com.mbox *@vix.com all users
vix.com.dom vix.com
*.vix.com.dom *.vix.com
192.5.5.240.28.net 192.5.5.240/28
130.93.0.0.24.net 130.93.0/24 note ".0.0"
192.5.5.1.host 192.5.5.1
It simply requires two things. First someone to implement the
RBL domain and install the blacklisted objects in it. Second
for the support in exim to be extended.
I think that the current RBL proves two things. First that access
to a common database works reasonably well. Second that using DNS
for this purpose is not an unreasonable thing to do. Performance is
acceptable and implementation of the service and the MTA software
is not difficult because we are leveraging off existing software
libraries.
--
Stuart Lynne <sl@???> 604-933-1000 <http://www.poste.com>
PGP Fingerprint: 28 E2 A0 15 99 62 9A 00 88 EC A3 EE 2D 1C 15 68
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
