On Sunday 01 November 2009 12:24:54 mouss wrote:
> Simon Morvan a écrit :
> > Le 30/10/2009 16:05, /dev/rob0 a écrit :
> >>[snip]
> >>
> >> Consider Zen here. It also incorporates the (not-quite-so) new PBL,
> >> which has been very effective here.
> >
> > The last time I tried it, Zen included too many legitimate users behind
> > ADSL lines. The "Policy" behind PBL is a bit too restrictive. Maybe it
> > changed, I'll give it another try.
>
> AFAIK, the policy didn't change. but chances are that people who used to
> send directly have moved to a relay model. The PBL is used in many
> places. and some large sites use more restrictive lists anyway. so
> insisting on sending directly only causes grief, and things are mostly
> likely to "get worse".
>
> I personally use dnswl.org. so users who get blocked by the PBL are
> invited to submit their IP to dnswl.org.
A truly static IP address (with custom rDNS) on PBL can be removed by
the user; there is a web form with automated checks and a manual
review process. This typically shouldn't take more than a day or two.
If it's NOT static, why should it be whitelisted? When will it
change? Are checks done to ensure that it's still under control of
the dnswl.org. submitter?
--
Offlist mail to this address is discarded unless
"/dev/rob0" or "not-spam" is in Subject: header
