Author: Adam Funk Date: To: exim-users Subject: Re: [exim] (OT) Responsibility of ISPs to provide reliable outgoing
SMTP to dynamic IP customers.
On Friday 02 September 2005 15:11, Peter Bowyer wrote:
> Including those who don't care, and if your action is successful,
> will end up paying for the premium level of service anyway? What SLA
> are you going to insist on the ISP providing across its probable
> 7-figure user base?
All I am after is partial refunds of customers' monthly subscriptions
when outgoing mail is not working properly -- not consequential damages
or anything like that -- so that ISPs have a financial incentive to
give it serious attention.
> There are well-documented aternatives for those who insist on the
> right to do direct delivery of email
I'm not asking for direct delivery from a dynamic IP. I've accepted the
arguments of those who say they need to prevent this now.
> from a server in their kitchen -
Derogatory remarks like that are irrelevant and unconstructive. A
machine's type of connection (cable modem, university network, etc.)
bears little relation to the competence, intentions or ethics of the
person running it.
Spammers are able and willing to spend lots of money to procure
equipment and connections and to hire professional expertise for their
mail. I'm sure you'd agree that expenditure and technical knowledge do
not legitimate their use of the internet.
You seem to be insulting GNU/Linux/BSD hobbyists, who are *not* running
the infected Windows machines that cause the primary problems that have
led to blacklisting dynamic IPs. (I do not claim that we never cause
any problems, just not that big one.)
> It's called choice - which you're proposing to reduce.
No, it's making a business take responsibility for the services it sells
instead of "hiding behind the fine print".
