On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 11:18:05 -0500 John Clizbe <j...@mozilla-enigmail.org> articulated:
> Mark H. Wood wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 05:57:50PM +0200, Joke de Buhr wrote: > >> You do not sacrifice legitimate incoming mail because there is an > >> RFC that clearly states mailservers do not operate from dynamic IP > >> addresses. Therefore they can not be considered valid. > > > > If there is such an RFC, it's rubbish; I run an MTA at home on my > > dynamic address, and it works just fine, and is quite valid. > > EXACTLY what Mark said, "RUBBISH" > > MTA and keyserver here. My home ISP "blesses" me with a new address > about once every six months. Router automagically updates my DNS > provider and everything is good to go. > > Cite the RFC, please. The Spamhaus PBL might very well list you. 76.185.38.113 is listed in the PBL Mailservers using this blocklist would probably block mail from you. Obtaining a static IP is easily done so I don't know why someone would want to risk using a dynamic IP. In any case, a very large percentage of SPAM originates from dynamic IPs, which is why I routinely block them. -- Jerry gnupg.u...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________ He's just a politician trying to save both his faces...
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
