In <853adb5f-69bf-4322-b80a-be47276ebf48@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, on
11/23/2007
at 03:16 AM, fiangotech hotmail.com> said:

What previous owner? Steadfast has had it since 2006-02-17. Fiango
Technologies is *not* the owner.

There is no "the list"; there are various lists, with various policies. If
you have a question about a listing, please include the list and the
record number in your subject.

Why? That adds to their costs.

Now, there are some lists whose operators accept comments, provide
notifications, etc., but that is because they choose to do so, not because
they are obligated to do so.

I would like to quote exactly the same issue. We've been blocked for a
while so far. We've really had a problem but it was fixed. How LONG
does it take to get delisted? Or was this filter created just to claim
money???

If so, I'll post on every single forum that this spamlist belongs to a
selfish profit organization, not like other legitimate sources....

On Nov 23, 4:16 am, fiangotech hotmail.com> wrote:

...

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 03:16:23 +0000, fiangotech wrote:

A comparison I think would be worthwhile would be to compare spam-catch
and "false positive" rates of using rDNS properties, that is a test policy
of tag or reject any SMTP sessions or email where the transmitting SMTP
peer has either missing or "generic" reverse DNS data and comparing this
to the performance of ZEN, SORBS, UCEPROTECT etc.

What I mean by "rDNS properties" are the following:
(list is probably not all-inclusive)

No rDNS at all or
rDNS contains text strings known to be assigned to address blocks
used only by "residential" cable modem and ADSL customers who generally
do not knowingly transmit SMTP direct to the recipent's mail system;
examples I can think of at the moment include:
"hsi" "res" "pool" "adsl" (without "static" or "biz" etc)
or where the rDNS contains a textual representation of the IP address.

Some might want to include "web" or other indications of a generic web
server; I think that would boost false positives because it is possble for
a Web server to be a legitimate source of email direct-to-MX (though
I and I'm sure quite a few others think this is a sub-optimal condition
given the number of web servers which get hacked or exploited).

You are blocking the entire verizon dynamic ip space. I don't blame
you.
But the address space my server is on has been converted to dynamic.
72.97.114.x. I ask you to consider updating your block list.

Good day,
my server is listed in backscatterer.org blacklist, but if I try to
send an email to an nonexistant account on it I get:
550 : Recipient address rejected: User unknown in
virtual mailbox table
that is the correct answert. So I think to be list because I'm backup
MX for some customer's domain so how to deal with the situatione where
my mail server is only a backup MX for another ? If you send email
through my server it's accepted just because it doesn't know which
email are configured in the primary mailserver.
Any hint ?

These "McFadden Associates" DNSBLs (bl.csma.biz/sbl.csma.biz) have
been having name server issues intermittently over the past week or
more. It's to the point where I've had to remove them from my own
lookup tools, as they slow things down.

Anybody know what the story is there? Anybody actually use these BLs?

Regards,
Al Iverson

--
Al Iverson -- http://www.aliverson.com -- Chicago, IL, USA
News, stats and more on blacklists at http://www.dnsbl.com