JINMEI Tatuya / wrote:
At Mon, 26 Feb 2007 16:30:46 -0500,
Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Title : Considerations for the use of DNS Reverse Mapping
Author(s) : D. Senie, A. Sullivan
Filename: draft-ietf-dnsop-reverse-mapping-co
> BTW, one technical point about AOL:
>
> AOL is not an ISP;
It really does not matter what the genesis of AOL was they are a
ISP today. Also AOL started in 1985. The Internet pre-dates AOL.
Fast Facts as of November, 2006
* AOL is the leading Internet service pro
I didn't _assume_ their assumptions were false. I showed the reasons why
their assumptions were false.
--Dean
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Joe Abley wrote:
>
> On 26-Mar-2007, at 14:48, Dean Anderson wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Robert Story wrote:
> >
> >> DA> Assuming an 'appare
BTW, one technical point about AOL:
AOL is not an ISP; AOL is an online content provider. AOL/Compuserve
predates the internet. Internet email is a free option that AOL doesn't
have to provide. AOL can drop internet access without violating their
user contract, which is for AOL proprietary online
On 26-Mar-2007, at 14:48, Dean Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Robert Story wrote:
DA> Assuming an 'apparent inability to update reverse tree' is a
false
DA> assumption:
But you can't dictate other peoples assumptions. Assumptions are
often
based on ones personal experiences, and i
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007, Robert Story wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:39:59 -0400 (EDT) Dean wrote:
> DA> Real anti-spam groups at large ISPs don't use reverse DNS for spam
> DA> filtering. There have been attempts to do so in the past, but those
> DA> ended in (sometimes well-publicized) disasters
It seems obvious, that when faced with significant problems in the
current approach, it is relevant to consider whether that approach still
makes sense.
Blindly continuing a practice merely because it was done before is the
essense of foolhardiness. [I suspect that should be attributed to
someone,
On Mar 26, 2007, at 7:33 AM, Robert Story wrote:
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:39:59 -0400 (EDT) Dean wrote:
DA> Real anti-spam groups at large ISPs don't use reverse DNS for spam
DA> filtering. There have been attempts to do so in the past, but
those
DA> ended in (sometimes well-publicized) disas
Dear colleagues,
Dean has already made clear, in a previous exchange on this list, that
he does not think draft-ietf-dnsop-reverse-mapping-considerations in
any revision, past or future, can be made to address his concerns; my
understanding is that this is why he has offered an alternative draft
t
On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:39:59 -0400 (EDT) Dean wrote:
DA> Real anti-spam groups at large ISPs don't use reverse DNS for spam
DA> filtering. There have been attempts to do so in the past, but those
DA> ended in (sometimes well-publicized) disasters.
This is patently and provably false. AOL clearly
10 matches
Mail list logo
