nanog mailing list archives
Re: Email peering
From: Joe Maimon <jmaimon () ttec com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 06:09:42 -0400
Michael.Dillon () btradianz com wrote:
Similar concept, same scaling problems; it just hides the explicitroutingfrom the user (as would any modern "peering" system, presumably).
<snip>
One way that it COULD be implemented is for people accepting incoming email on port 25 to check a whitelist before accepting email. Only operators who have signed a peering agreement would be on the whitelist. Presumably, the whitelist would be servedup by your regional association and they would have some means of relaying queries (or synchronizing their database) with the other 4 regions.
DNSWL -- this is already being done. It is not widely viewed as being in any way similar to a peering concept. What would be more similar would be a consortium of large providers providing such a whitelist. That would be something I would welcome.
I would settle for having aol,msn,yahoo,earthlink,cablevision or any half dozen providers making public THEIR whitelists.
The problem is that there does not appear to be any incentive for them to do so -- fee or no fee.
In fact, I would encourage anyone planning on ragging on DNSBL's to put up AND shut up, namely operate a DNSWL.
Existing public whitelists include: exemption.ahbl.org bondedsender.org habeas.com To use it with sendmail: jlewis's http://njabl.org/dnswl.m4 http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.mail.sendmail/msg/a26d1cbd1c739626 To use it with spamassassin: header XXX_DNSWL eval:check_rbl('xxx-firsttrusted', 'xxx.ttec.net') score XXX_DNSWL -5 Anyone else with a public DNS whitelist? <snip>
Current thread:
- Re: Email peering (Was: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's Sender IDAuthentication......?], (continued)
- Re: Email peering (Was: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's Sender IDAuthentication......?] Michael . Dillon (Jun 17)
- Re: Email peering (Was: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's Sender IDAuthentication......?] Todd Vierling (Jun 19)
- Re: Email peering (Was: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's Sender IDAuthentication......?] Jon Lewis (Jun 19)
- Informal email peering (was: Email peering) Dave Crocker (Jun 16)
- Re: Email peering (Was: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's Sender IDAuthentication......?] Todd Vierling (Jun 16)
- Re: Email peering (Was: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's Sender IDAuthentication......?] Joe Maimon (Jun 16)
- Re: Email peering (Was: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's Sender IDAuthentication......?] Steven M. Bellovin (Jun 16)
- Re: Email peering (Was: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's Sender IDAuthentication......?] Todd Vierling (Jun 16)
- Re: Email peering (Was: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's Sender IDAuthentication......?] william(at)elan.net (Jun 16)
- Re: Email peering Michael . Dillon (Jun 17)
- Re: Email peering Joe Maimon (Jun 17)
- Re: Email peering Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jun 17)
- Re: Email peering Dave Crocker (Jun 18)
- Re: Email peering Steven M. Bellovin (Jun 17)
- Re: Email peering Mike Leber (Jun 17)
- Re: Email peering John Levine (Jun 18)
- Re: Email peering Mike Leber (Jun 18)
- Re: Email peering John Levine (Jun 18)
- Re: Email peering Alexei Roudnev (Jun 19)
- Re: Email peering Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jun 20)
- Re: Email peering (Was: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's Sender IDAuthentication......?] Michael . Dillon (Jun 17)