Re: IP-Echelon Compliance

[Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>]

looks like ip-echelon's MX's are:
67.43.171.100 - 67.43.171.96/27
67.43.165.163 - 67.43.165.160/27
203.122.134.3 - 122-134-3.dsl.connexus.net.au. ?

you could presumably just iptables away (or postfix reject) from
those, and then there's this:

;; ANSWER SECTION:
ip-echelon.com.         300     IN      TXT     "v=spf1
include:mailgun.org ~all"
ip-echelon.com.         300     IN      TXT     "v=spf1
include:mail.zendesk.com ?all"
ip-echelon.com.         300     IN      TXT     "v=spf1
ptr:ip-echelon.com ip4:67.43.171.96/27 ip4:67.43.165.160/27
ip4:203.122.134.0/28 include:_spf.google.com ~all"
ip-echelon.com.         300     IN      TXT     "MS=ms85153493"

joy. messy :(


On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 10:36 AM,  <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 14:20:39 +0200, Randy Bush said:
> > > > http://www.procmail.org/
> > > I wouldn't necessarily recommend that approach.  There is no
> > > obligation for victims of spammers to continue providing Internet
> > > services to them, including SMTP services.
> >
> > computers are cheap.  my time is finite and i value it highly.  what is
> > the minimal action i can take to see that idiots do not take my time?
>
> I suppose it would be bad form to suggest hiring somebody from <insert favorite
> crime cartel> with a Louisville Slugger to perform percussive maintenance on
> the offending party?