nanog mailing list archives
Re: marking dynamic ranges, was fixing insecure email infrastructure
From: John Levine <johnl () iecc com>
Date: 13 Jan 2005 20:57:05 -0000
What is wrong with MTAMARK?
MTAMARK tags the reverse entries of IP addresses where SMTP servers are. Fixes this problem very fast, efficient and with little effort (script magic to regenerate the reverse DNS entries).
In priciple, nothing. In practice, the rDNS is a mess and I don't know many people who think it's likely to get cleaned up enough that we can expect to put in all the MTA MARK entries. -- John R. Levine, IECC, POB 727, Trumansburg NY 14886 +1 607 330 5711 johnl () iecc com, Mayor, http://johnlevine.com, Member, Provisional board, Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial E-mail
Current thread:
- Re: fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article] Window of "anonymity" when domain exists, whois not updated yet), (continued)
- Re: fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article] Window of "anonymity" when domain exists, whois not updated yet) Steven Champeon (Jan 12)
- Re: fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article] Window of "anonymity" when domain exists, whois not updated yet) Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine (Jan 12)
- Re: fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article] Window of "anonymity" when domain exists, whois not updated yet) Adi Linden (Jan 12)
- Re: fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article] Window of "anonymity" when domain exists, whois not updated yet) Steven Champeon (Jan 12)
- Re: fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article] Window of "anonymity" when domain exists, whois not updated yet) Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 12)
- Re: fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article] Window of "anonymity" when domain exists, whois not updated yet) Dave Crocker (Jan 12)
- Re: fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article] Window of "anonymity" when domain exists, whois not updated yet) Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 12)
- Re: fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article] Window of "anonymity" when domain exists, whois not updated yet) Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jan 12)
- Re: fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article] Window of "anonymity" when domain exists, whois not updated yet) Steven Champeon (Jan 12)
- Re: fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article] Window of "anonymity" when domain exists, whois not updated yet) Andre Oppermann (Jan 13)
- Re: marking dynamic ranges, was fixing insecure email infrastructure John Levine (Jan 13)
- Re: marking dynamic ranges, was fixing insecure email infrastructure Markus Stumpf (Jan 24)
- Re: marking dynamic ranges, was fixing insecure email infrastructure Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jan 24)
- Re: marking dynamic ranges, was fixing insecure email infrastructure Markus Stumpf (Jan 25)
- Re: marking dynamic ranges, was fixing insecure email infrastructure Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 25)
- Re: marking dynamic ranges, was fixing insecure email infrastructure Markus Stumpf (Jan 25)
- Re: marking dynamic ranges, was fixing insecure email infrastructure J.D. Falk (Jan 25)
- Re: marking dynamic ranges, was fixing insecure email infrastructure Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 25)
- Re: marking dynamic ranges, was fixing insecure email infrastructure Markus Stumpf (Jan 25)
- Re: marking dynamic ranges, was fixing insecure email infrastructure Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jan 25)
- Message not available
- Re: fixing insecure email infrastructure (was: Re: [eweek article] Mark Andrews (Jan 13)