[ On Friday, November 3, 2000 at 19:26:19 (-0600), Dave Huang wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: printer supplies 
>
> Who says my mail server isn't valid? My mail server is just as good as
> my ISP's mail server, thank you very much. I have no idea if it's on the
> MAPS DUL, but I do have a dial-up connection to my ISP.

If your ISP put your address(es) into the MAPS DUL then they consider it
invalid for you to be running a mail server.

This is obviously not the case since this copy of your message was
delivered directly to my mailserver which does check the MAPS DUL.

The MAPS "Dial-Up-List" is intended for dynamicaly assigned addresses
which, by definition, cannot run an SMTP server and which are very
unlikely to run an SMTP server which *needs* world visibility (where
"needs" is falisified by definition if the dial-up provider offers an
authorised outgoing mail relay for your use).  Some providers don't list
their dynamic/dial-up IPs in the DUL but instead do the smarter thing
and install filters to block outbound port-25 connects thus directly
forcing their users to use their authorised mail relay(s).

> > I.e. use your provider's authorised relay or lose.
> 
> No thanks...

Look, if your address(es) were listed in the MAPS DUL then this isn't a
choice you can make -- it would already have been made for you and
indeed you would either have to use your provider's authorised relay or
you would not be able to send any e-mail to any one of the wide numbers
of domains that protect their users from direct spam (such as what we've
been seeing in the NetBSD lists) by using the MAPS DUL.  There are no
if's and's or but's about it and you have no say in the matter whatsover
(except in voting with your feet and walking over to another provider).
If you can't send your e-mail out to some sites because you're not using
the approved setup required by your ISP then you lose.  Period.

All I'm saying is that if the NetBSD mail servers should also start
using the MAPS DUL (and hopefully the other MAPS "rbl" lists too!) to
protect those of us on the list from the direct spam we're currently
suffering from on these lists.  Very few people will "lose" if this
change is made, and indeed *all* of those people will no doubt be
perfectly able to figure out what's happened to their ability to post to
the lists and what to do to correct *their* problem.

Now if you people would kindly pay attention to the reply-to address
I've set in my outgoing messages we could take this discussion off-line!

-- 
							Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098      VE3TCP      <gwoods@acm.org>      <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>