nanog mailing list archives
Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers
From: Jay Ashworth <jra () baylink com>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 15:33:51 -0400 (EDT)
----- Original Message -----
From: "William Herrin" <bill () herrin us>
Interesting. I want to abstract and restate what I think you just said and ask you to correct my understanding: Making a service accessible to the public via the Internet implicitly grants some basic permission to that public to make use of the service, permission which can not be revoked solely by saying so.
That's correct; did you think it wasn't? The offer is *in the presence of a standard service on a standard port*; if I put a SMTP receiver on tcp/25, you are, yes, implicitly permitted to try to use it to send me email. There *is no place* to put "saying permission is revoked", so where would someone look, even if their daemon wanted to look.
If that's the case, what is the common denominator? What is the standard of permission automatically granted by placing an email server on the internet, from which a particular operator may grant more permission but may not reasonably grant less? Put another way, what's the whitelist of activities for which we generally expect our vendor to ignore complaints, what's the blacklist of activities for which a vendor who fails to adequately redress complaints is misbehaving and what's left in the gray zone where behavior might be abusive but is not automatically so?
If there are specific things you want people not to do, *make it impossible for them to do those things* (ssh authentication, for example). Above that, I suppose that rate limiting failures is expected of a connecting client... Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra () baylink com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
Current thread:
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers, (continued)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers William Herrin (Oct 27)
- RE: Outgoing SMTP Servers Brian Johnson (Oct 27)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 27)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Pete Carah (Oct 27)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers William Herrin (Oct 27)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Dave CROCKER (Oct 27)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers William Herrin (Oct 27)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Joel jaeggli (Oct 27)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers William Herrin (Oct 28)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers -Hammer- (Oct 28)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Jay Ashworth (Oct 28)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Dave CROCKER (Oct 30)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Brian Johnson (Oct 30)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Dave CROCKER (Oct 30)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Michael Thomas (Oct 31)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Jack Bates (Oct 31)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Brian Johnson (Oct 31)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Jack Bates (Oct 31)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Robert Bonomi (Oct 31)
- Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers Brian Johnson (Oct 31)
- RE: Outgoing SMTP Servers Keith Medcalf (Oct 31)