ISPs blocking SMTP connections from dynamic IP address space

[Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg]

Kevin Stevens wrote:

>On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg wrote:
>  
>
>>Its still not a reason for allowing relay from dynamic addresses.
>>All ISP's, or atleast all serious ISP's, provide their customer with a
>>relaying mailserver. Its a simple task to configure your mailserver to
>>use your ISP's smtp as smarthost and relay all outgoing email trough
>>them. I know, I use this setup myself, since just like you I cant afford
>>"real" connections everywhere but have to rely on cheap DSL or cable.
>>    
>>
>Bullshit.  My ISP's lack of ability to deliver mail reliably is what made
>me start my own mail service in the first place.  Nor do I particularly
>want to hand them my mail so they can riffle through it at their leisure
>rather than having to scan for it on the wire in realtime.
>
If youre ISP is unable to deliver mail reliably then you should switch 
to another ISP immediatly, imho.
There are way to many ISP's out there that doesnt have a clue what they 
are doing, and the only reason they still exist is that people keep 
using them.
Im not saying you should go with one of the big ones, I hate AOL and MSN 
just as much as any other guy, but there are plenty of ISP's out there 
that Im sure know what they are doing and really care about customer 
service.
And if you dont want people to read your mail, you should use PGP or 
something similar, even if you run your own mailserver.

>>Today its far to easy to get your email out on the 'net. Even the "high
>>school dropouts" as you call the spammers can buy a cheap DSL
>>connection, setup a mailserver and spam like crazy untill the ISP gets
>>enough complaints to cut them off. When that happens, they get a new
>>connection and start all over.
>>
>>As long as we rely on the old and very outdated SMTP protocoll that
>>powers the net today, precautions will have to be taken very soon, or
>>email will be useless in a few years.
>>    
>>
>
>Fine.  Then replace it, or require authentication at receiving points, or
>some other solution that directly addresses the problem.  Wholesale
>blocking of  types of transport is a crappy solution.  It's unfair, liable
>to huge amounts of false positives, and leads directly to the kind of
>centralized, locked down Internet that will spell its demise.
>
>KeS
>  
>
Thats easier said then done. You do realize what a monumental task it 
would be to replace SMTP, dont you?
But hey, if you have a plug n' play solution that will just drop in and 
replace SMTP without breaking anything, Im all for it!

I do not agree on your opinion that taking some needed actions will lock 
down the internet and kill it. I think its completely the other way 
around. If we dont do something about spam now, noone will want to be on 
the internet in a few years time. Email will be impossible to use due to 
the signal to noise ratio, www will be cluttered with popups, banners 
and ad's for porn site, and every single file will contian a trojan or worm.

I cant believe I sound like some domesday prophet, Im actually known 
among those who know me as a fanatic advocate of a free internet, but as 
I see it the internet is slowly selfdestructing. Its no longer a 
creation of research and educational needs, its being used for pure 
profit and the dream of making fast and easy money. And I dont like that.

--
R