Matt Fretwell said: > Dennis Peterson wrote: > >> Here's how it works, Matt - if you have a dynamic IP, even one that has >> a long life time, other people will still block mail from your IP block. >> That seldom happens if you have a true fixed IP, all other things being >> equal. And you know what? You have no say in it. It is out of your >> control. And if the number of Windows drones continues to grow at the >> current rate you can expect to be blocked pretty damn soon as there's >> just about nothing else left to do. And I'm ok with that. > > > Just for later 'discussion' purposes, as your headers for this mail will > prove, I am on a static IP range.
I'm using "you" in the generic sense for discussion. Not refering to you, Matt. I could have been more clear on that. > > I am not in the same boat as John, but I still would not dream of > penalising without a proven, (with regards to what my own logs say), > reason. The really annoying thing is, it is easy to set up an automated > system to add offending IP's or IP blocks to your own local rbl's, so any > IP, whether it be dynamic or static has a one shot chance. There is no > need to block outright from the outset. As I mentioned earlier, I'm getting slammed from comcast.net from relays all over the US. It is far easier to block by obvious dsl/cable host identifiers than to spend hours trying to figure out what /24 IP ranges to tweek. I see the problem as comcasts, not mine. Your milage may vary - I know mine did. dp _______________________________________________ http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html
