Re: sink.arpa question

From: Tony Finch (no email)
Date: Fri Dec 18 2009 - 12:45:14 EST

  • Next message: Jason Bertoch: "Re: sink.arpa question"

    On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Jason Bertoch wrote:
    >
    > Isn't the fundamental problem that SMTP can fall back to an implicit MX?
    > None of these solutions will stop spammers from skipping MX records and
    > using direct-to-host connections.

    This has nothing to do with spam.

    > Shouldn't we just consider dropping the implicit MX back door as opposed
    > to getting creative with MX records that spammers will surely note and
    > avoid anyway?

    It's impossible to make that kind of incompatible change with an installed
    base of billions of users. It's already impossible to eliminate the AAAA
    fallback and keep the A fallback.

    Tony.

    -- 
    f.anthony.n.finch  <>  http://dotat.at/
    GERMAN BIGHT HUMBER: SOUTHWEST 5 TO 7. MODERATE OR ROUGH. SQUALLY SHOWERS.
    MODERATE OR GOOD.
    

  • Next message: Jason Bertoch: "Re: sink.arpa question"





    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs



    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD