Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone?
John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 26 August 2009 18:06 UTC
Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FCDD3A6CB5 for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:06:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -18.028
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-18.028 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.688, BAYES_20=-0.74, HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI=-4.3, RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED=-4.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y9rqSpAfoCoc for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:05:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [208.31.42.53]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 255C03A6AA6 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:05:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 49772 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2009 18:06:02 -0000
Received: from mail1.iecc.com (208.31.42.56) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 26 Aug 2009 18:06:02 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=k0908; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=BMEIuRuB+nSKmOhTSqb7Mm0MoGdd7ha9GDj408TecYY=; b=nuSEWlMrFTHUOYhvEz7BFj7+MXW4Q31HReio1ngSa5vHmat378U01KWbURma6Gik+2C/3lwepxCwz99ZDvbdQ/JbGX+59sGTnlRbLA2a+pv+C7JyPz2UfGbzmuUViDGAB1UAVCkDWATjVHUeHXZQgfi0nWehL644tNOGtWg18+U=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=k0908; bh=BMEIuRuB+nSKmOhTSqb7Mm0MoGdd7ha9GDj408TecYY=; b=KfBo3StTP2MPNHuHSaTMQfHBxwFArlgROLL/RAVrVQu9toYUA4+/yI58tBjMDqS4bMASGudhHjkpoTN+HNR9fQtZ6Y3xZWwKYH70mldZTRBWSVtiBdDz/wbJdTsQN6W6/KR46a5zNXhonjpcWxgVGJ3s6xd3jnhtM2wm+qXa0xM=
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 18:06:01 -0000
Message-ID: <20090826180601.79333.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: asrg@irtf.org
In-Reply-To: <45ae90370908260906t223ea020g1e964670fad7ef0d@mail.gmail.com>
Organization:
Cc:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone?
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 18:06:00 -0000
>Rich, does ipv6 change any of this? I'm not Rich, but the open question at this point is how effective DNSBLs will be on IPv6. A DNSBL that blocks a single IP at a time, like the CBL and XBL, would be unworkable. A typical v6 setup allocates a /64 to each host which allows various sorts of clever self-configuration, but also means the host can easily use a different IP address for every connection it ever makes. (At one address per millisecond, it would take 500 million years to run through a /64.) DNSBLs can and do list ranges, and an obvious change would be to make the finest listed granularity be a /64, but we really have no idea how the vast number of v6 addresses will be handed out, and whether it will be practical to create listings that cover all of the available addresses for a particular host without also listing a lot of its neighbors. This suggests that whitelisting techniques (most likely based on DKIM) will become much more important to recognize mail from people you know are credible. R's, John
- Re: [Asrg] SMTP pull anyone? John Levine
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? John Levine
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Steve Atkins
- [Asrg] SMTP pull anyone? Ravi shankar
- Re: [Asrg] SMTP pull anyone? Bill Cole
- Re: [Asrg] SMTP pull anyone? mathew
- Re: [Asrg] SMTP pull anyone? Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] SMTP pull anyone? John Levine
- [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Ravi shankar
- Re: [Asrg] SMTP pull anyone? Ian Eiloart
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? John Levine
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Rich Kulawiec
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Douglas Otis
- Re: [Asrg] SMTP pull anyone? Michael Thomas
- Re: [Asrg] SMTP pull anyone? Douglas Otis
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Ravi shankar
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Rich Kulawiec
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [Asrg] SMTP pull anyone? Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [Asrg] SMTP pull anyone? Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Bill Cole
- Re: [Asrg] SMTP pull anyone? Bart Schaefer
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Douglas Otis
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Chris Lewis
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Dave CROCKER
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Douglas Otis
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Chris Lewis
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Jeff Macdonald
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? John Levine
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Douglas Otis
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Daniel Feenberg
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Graeme Fowler
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Rich Kulawiec
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Jeff Macdonald
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Steve Atkins
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Chris Lewis
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Alessandro Vesely
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Tim Chown
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Rich Kulawiec
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Douglas Otis
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Daniel Feenberg
- Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone? Douglas Otis