Re: [SPAM] Re: [dns-wg] rMX and rDNS together make spamming more difficult ?

[Patrik Fältström <]

On 2003-11-28, at 06.57, use.signature.ripe@localhost wrote:

> > Probably. The dns-wg is about dns, not about anti-spam. Maybe you
> > should take your ideas to the antispam group first.
> I think that is very limited thinking. If we all only think that I 
> only care my sandbox then we have this kind of problem. It was one of 
> RIPE s person said after I was published this idea in a antispamlist 
> that maybe also open discuss on dns-wg list ...
What Jaap is saying is that the DNS wg is dealing with DNS issues, and 
the RMX one is definitely not a DNS issue. The DNS part of RMX is 
simple, and works.

The impact on SMTP, and potentially what RMX help with etc must be 
discussed with SMTP people, not DNS people.

Of course, the membership of such groups (DNS and SMTP) is overlapping, 
BUT, we need to try to make sure things are discussed in the correct 
forum.

> Why dns-wg ? Because if we (operator, ISP,...) like to build better 
> working net, we need dns help also in this kind of solution. And my 
> ideas (and MTAmark) need in-addr.arpa domains updating. That the 
> reason why I published my idea also in this forum.
Correct, and DNS issues and rules are to be discussed here. Including a 
rule which say "one should always have RMX records if one have MX" is 
such a potential rule.

    paf