AOL now rejecting mail from Comcast residential IPs.

[Thomas Charron]

Quoting Jeff Kinz <jkinz at kinz.org>:
> On Sun, Mar 30, 2003 at 10:09:38PM -0500, Ben Boulanger wrote:
> > Ya know, I said my part.  I put my .02 in... but I just can't sit here
> and 
> > listen to this anymore.  Here's what it comes down to:  You ARE in IP
> > Space of known open relays.  You ARE in known residential space.  You ARE 
> > paying a low premium for high bandwidth (compare it if you disagree). 
> Hi Ben, et al....
> Let me see if I understand your proposition correctly:
> as I understand your logic above you are saying that its OK to punish anyone 
> who is in close proximity to lawbreakers as long as your doing it to punish
> lawbreakers?

Since when is forcing an SMTP server to accept your mail a punishment?

What you are saying is basically that the use of an SMTP server is now a god 
given right, along side freedom?

> For lawbreakers you can say spammers if that makes you more
> comfortable.

It's not the spammers here.  It's the open relays that spammers USE.  It's the 
people who relay.

> hmmmm - No - this definitely doesn't pass my sniff test.  By your logic
> its ok to fine or put in jail anyone who lives next to drug dealers or

Again, you're not being put in jail.  They're saying, "I don't want you 
calling me".  Tell me..  Anyone here have a caller ID block on unknown numbers?

I'M BEING REPRESSED!  I'M BEING REPRESSED!

> Yes it works for companies, but then companies are entities that make 
> conscious, well informed decisions to let people die because the
> cost of the lawsuits is calculated to cost less than changing a design
> defect that left the gas tank filler neck of the Ford Pinto just a 
> wee bit too short.  I don't think we want to follow that kind of lead
> as an example of principled behavior.

Oh my GOD man.  They rejected your SMTP email.  Shesh.  Since the protocol has 
no built in method of authentication, this is the best they can do.  You can 
either eat spam, or do something like this.  Period.

> The reason AOL is blocking 
> those IP's is its easier than actually blocking the spammers.
> But its wrong.  Its breaks the internet, a little bit and begins 
> the whole kit and kaboodle sliding toward the day when all email
> and web services MUST go through an AOL/ISP approved node.  

They are blacklisting addresses of known open relays.  They are refusing to 
deliver pizza to an area where people are known to allow attack dogs to freely 
roam the streets.

> That must never happen but all the large ISP's would like it to.
> Does anyone think that AOl would never try to act like some of the other
> large monopolistic companies?

Could very well be.  But this is one move that, while being annoying as all 
hell, is a viable attempt to securing something.

You know..  The same reason why some here always include their PGP signature 
to validate identiy?

--
Thomas Charron
-={ Is beadarrach an ni an onair }=-