There are other ways to control spam that doesn't include blocking. For
example, you can add a small delay between sending messages. For the normal
user, the delay won't be an issue but for someone who's trying to send out
thousands and thousands of e-mails it would be almost impossible to
send it all
out in a reasonable amount of time. Maybe cap someone's daily limit of
e-mails
sent through your servers? I mean, most people don't send more than a hundred
messages a day. If they do, they can ask for a higher e-mail cap.
I don't agree with IP blocking... that's a brute force, dumb method of trying
to control spam. Besides, most spam is sent through dynamic IP zombie
machines
nowadays. We need a more intelligent method but I don't believe this
problem is
going to ever go away. There's too much money to be made on both sides of the
issue.
Sincerely,
Richard Morgan
Heavy Systems Administrator
http://www.heavysystems.com
Powerful web hosting and server solutions for your business.
Heavy Systems is an Authorized AMD Solution Provider.
Quoting Paul M Foster <paulf@quillandmouse.com>:
> Mike Branda wrote:
>
>> Funny you guys should mention this....
>>
>> We're currently hosting (at the office) with Dreamhost out of Calif. and
>> I am fighting with them on issues of AOL blocking our outbound e-mailsto
>> their customers due to supposed high traffic. This started last week.
>> Dreamhost says they have conferred with AOL and have fixed the blocking
>> issue but e-mails still bounce with the same AOL error code. And of
>> course the end user doesn't give a rip why it's happening. All they
>> know is they can't complete daily tasks involving AOL recipients because
>> of it and somehow I'm to blame. I'm all in favor of reducing spam but
>> there has to be a less abrasive method and better resolutions than what
>> is starting to take place at ISP's.
>>
>
> AOL's AOL. I don't know what their criteria are. I'm guessing they're
> about as arrogant and capricious as Microsoft. Their attitude is
> probably like, "If you're not on AOL, you don't deserve to be on the
> internet, and we can block you for any reason."
>
> I haven't checked spamcop's criteria, but it appears one only has to
> complain. The last time this happened to us, I was told that some guy
> had received an email from a list he'd forgotten he'd subscribed to,
> and reported it to spamcop. Voila, a 24 hour block on our IP.
>
> There used to be a guy who ran an RBL service, who did it all
> automated. (Can't recall the name.) The tests would check for open
> relays, etc. No judgement involved. But he ran afoul of some city
> government somewhere who threatened to sue him, and shut his service
> down. Real shame.
>
> This is why I'm putting my customers on their own IP, and our company
> sites on a different IP. Most of them don't use our SMTP servers
> anyway (they use their ISP's email instead).
>
> --
> Paul M. Foster
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked
> Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages
> posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
> official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked
Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages
posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the
official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:10:00 EDT