> On 31.10.2006 09:32, * Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote: > >> Same here in Switzerland, at least one of the main national ISPs calls > >> his clients nn-nn-nn-nn.static.cablecom.ch > >> > >> But we had already rejections and spam-tags from many places > even before > >> that plugin came out. But they give you a reverse DNS entry of your own > >> hostname if you ask for. > > > > Well, you know, swiss is well known to be exact. > > > > Here in Italy it is a bit more difficult to get a RDNS changed > by Telecom Italia: FWIK, they really don't care about RDNS and > have no defined policies about it. > > > > > > A few months ago the said addresses were called > nn-nn-nn-nn.webcom.cablecom.ch until that day when SORBS just put all > these netblocks in its RBL as dynamic. And they refused to take it out > until the ISP changed the names to todays nn-nn-nn-nn.static.cablecom.ch > > So it looks to me that this plugin should exclude hosts which have > *static*, *sta* or *fixed* in their DNS names.
I agree with this. > SORBS uses the following Internet Draft for determining whether networks > are statically or dynamically by rDNS: > http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dnsop/draft-msullivan-dnsop-generic-namin > g-schemes-00.txt Right. Also, SORBS goes a bit (too?) further by including the "pool" word in RDNS as a dynamic address indicator. This sounds not that correct to me. (Again) Telecom Italia uses it to mark "address pools" on statically-assigned chunks: host1-231.pool8175.interbusiness.it. This means "the host 231.1 in the 81.75 address pool" and, believe me, has nothing to do with dynamic addresses: that's statically assigned (uses CLIP, too...). > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFFRxCLV5MZZmyxvGgRAkiZAKDX361SHB3MOeQaMtBmbPLHiccJBACePirl > CIkcQgKV3DkAWRI8UDfdmGQ= > =QKJl > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >
