On 07 Jun 19:08, Martin A. Brooks wrote:
> On 07/06/2009 18:57, Peter Bowyer wrote:
> > 2009/6/7 Martin A. Brooks<martin@???>:
> >
> >> And, yes, I know I'll get my usual bounce from your mail server when it
> >> throws away yet another perfectly legitimate non-spam email, because I
> >> dare to send email from my home ADSL connection, starting the email in
> >> RFC1918 space, with no matching reverse DNS.
> >>
> >
> > As I'm sure you've also found, there's enough of the internet that
> > share's Bill's view to make it a distinct disadvantage to the
> > deliverability of your mail to do this. Your call, of course, but the
> > genie's out of the bottle on this one.
> >
>
> Actually, Bill stands alone at the moment. He's the only person who's
> ever "Administratively prohibited" my emails in the 3 years this email
> address has been in use.
I would imagine that sending mail directly to me would result in very much the
same, I reject based on:
deny message = Reverse DNS lookup doesn't match IP
!authenticated = *
!verify = reverse_host_lookup
!hosts = 72.249.52.18 : 72.249.52.152
(The two excluded hosts from that are, IIRC, somewhere that I order food from
occasionally)...
> Still, Bill's server, his rules. Makes no real difference to me other
> than I dislike this sort of nonsense being mistaken for what the rules
> actually say.
I dislike the fact that the world is full of spammers - so anything that's a
quick win, with very few false positives, works for me.
Given that quite a few ISPs these days filter or transparently grab traffic to
port 25, I'd rather have a nice VM sitting on a real IP and relay via that.
Also means that whereever I am, I can use the same relay (SMTP auth is handy).
Cheers,
--
Brett Parker
