Re: [address-policy-wg] "Dirty" recycled network assigned
-
To: Florian Weimer fw@localhost
-
From: "Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet" Woeber@localhost
-
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:10:26 +0000
-
Organization: UniVie - ACOnet
-
Reply-to: Woeber@localhost
Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Wilfried Woeber:
>
>
>>>You also need to rewrite Received: lines, to remove records of the
>>>supposedly infected address space. And you should do this on a separate
>>>server on a dedicated prefix, so that misguided blacklist operators do
>>>not retaliate against your main mail service for doing that. 8-(
>>
>>I really don't get that one :-)
>
>
> Which part?
Sorry Florian,
I got somewhat mixed up between "received:" and "changed:" :-/
My apologies...
-W
> For certain mail relays, filter rules are applied to hosts behind it,
> not to the relay itself.
>
>
>>I suppose the NCC manufactures a completely fresh and shiny
>>address space object when giving out "previously used" address
>>space?
>
>
> They do. But blacklist operators do not seem to care. (Same for some
> routing database operators, BTW.)
>
> Apparently, it's also possible to wipe clean the record on your inetnum:
> objects, so it's understandable that the blacklist operators do not
> automatically wipe all the records from their databases just because the
> object appears to be new.
>
|