Odhiambo Washington wrote:
> * On 04/07/06 20:35 +0100, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> | Odhiambo Washington wrote:
> | >>From wash@??? Tue Jul 04 19:57:06 2006
> | > Return-path: wash@???
> | > Envelope-to: wash@???
> | > Delivery-date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 19:57:06 +0300
> | > Received: from acaen-251-1-97-4.w86-205.abo.wanadoo.fr ([86.205.243.4])
> | > by ns2.wananchi.com with esmtp (Exim 4.62 #0 (FreeBSD 4.11-STABLE))
> | > id 1FxoCv-0003Gc-1j
> | > for <wash@???>; Tue, 04 Jul 2006 19:57:06 +0300
> |
> | Hmm. On wanna-doo-doo, in France. Notorious.
> |
> | Only actually on spamcop, among the major dnsbl's - but do
> | you have enough business with France to not block .fr wholesale, and
> | whitelist as needed?
> |
> | Once you get annoyed enough, many ISPs and several whole
> | countries can be usefully dealt with that way.
>
> We're an ISP, so you don't get "annoyed" too easily ;)
> We have enough business with earth (the whole world) so we must only
> deal with what can be dealt with without excess collateral damage.
>
>
> cheers
> - wash
No need to block all of France. Or even all of wannadoo.
That particular source IP is in a block allocated portable, and
shows no PTR record.
The HELO/EHLO is probably broken also. I suspect it will have
exhibited other protocol violations.
Why would you allow a zombie or LinWin hobbyist to connect on
port 25 as a peer MX?
Bill
