> > Actually, it's more of a philosophical question; the MAPS RBL only
> > lists IP addresses which are associated with `hard' network abusers,
> > e.g. bulk friendly ISPs, etc. So sites choosing to block traffic (or
> > SMTP) from IP addresses listed on the RBL know fairly well that they
> > won't lose real email.
>
> Not necessarily true -- bulk friendly ISPs can also have legitimate
> customers.
I think you're wrong there.
In spam-fighter lingo, a ``bulk friendly ISP'' is an ISP willing to
tolerate its users sending unsolicited bulk email, which is one of the
more common definitions for spam. (Although not all spam fighters
agree on that definition.)
The RBL lists such ISPs, if they have shown that they will tolerate
customers who use their infrastructure to abuse the net. Web hosting
outfits that host pages for spammers and refuse to remove them are also
listed on the RBL, and I'm sure they have ``legitimate'' customers as
well.
The whole point of the RBL is to show pro-spam outfits that being pro-spam
HURTS. The idea is that when the non-spamming customers notice that
they've lost connectivity to large parts of the net, they will pressure
the outfit to get out of the RBL. (Either explicitly or implicitly, by
switching ISPs.) Getting out of the RBL means showing MAPS that the ISP
no longer tolerates spammers.
This is exactly why it is so HARD for an outfit to get on the RBL. The
RBL is not as much a mechanism to protect your mailbox as it is an attempt
to STOP spam. Spamming outfits don't get plonked into the RBL immediately;
only after education attempts fail and an outfit is proven to be totally
rogue will it be listed in the RBL.
> So when everyone and their wristwatch have their own IPv6 addresses we
> can stop using it. (For whatever reason.) It's wrong to force users to
> use their ISP's mail hubs, but having your mail server crumble under
> the load of spam isn't exactly right either, so each administrator
> decides on some compromise. I don't use either of these three systems,
> but I don't get a lot of spam. For some people it's better even to
> reject a legitimate e-mail once in a long while than to be unable to
> read it anyway because of all the spam.
The right solution, IMHO, it to complain.
Spam can be stopped if people complain. Otherwise, with all the black lists
and filters in the world, you're just burying your head in the sand.
=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
