[Gllug] RBL listed hosts

[Mark Lowes]

On Wed, 2002-06-12 at 11:22, Xander D Harkness wrote:
> I have just been tightening up spam policies and switching a number of 
> mailservers from warn mode to reject on rbl has a very dramtic effect.
> i.e. I lose a lot of mail from companies such as BT and NTL.

I generally find there are too many false positives on any of the RBLs
to set them into reject mode.

> This is not from their dial-up pool, but from the main corporate servers.
> Aside from these niggling little concerns (I have always thought BT 
> provides a realy poor service) it grabs a huge amount of spam.

You don't specify which RBL these servers are in, there are some out
there which will be listing these servers because the ISP itself isn't
handling abuse complaints properly or has poor / incorrect whois data.

> Do BT know?  Or are they as incompetent as I expect them to be.

Which bit of BT ? :)

> Do the large companies with RBL listed hosts ever get round to fixing 
> them?  This is something that I have not been aware of; however I am 
> sure with a few more servers on reject rather than warn they might be 
> convinced :-)

Depends on the nature of the listing and the policy within the company,
I know some are good, some are bad.

> In addition I have to have the multihop RBL in warn otherwise I lose 
> gllug posts :-)

Blocking on multihop RBLs is evil, you'll get horrendous amounts of
false positives (yes even my core servers end up on those lists
periodically thanks to stupid users.)

-- 
The Flying Hamster <hamster at korenwolf.net>     
http://www.korenwolf.net/
Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick
to reformat your documents in unexpected ways.

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug