Re: [Asrg] [ASRG] SMTP pull anyone?

"Chris Lewis" <clewis@nortel.com> Thu, 27 August 2009 03:48 UTC

Return-Path: <CLEWIS@nortel.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 E48D73A659A for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:48:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.11
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 oUUYhdaZSgXc for <asrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:48:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zrtps0kp.nortel.com (zrtps0kp.nortel.com [47.140.192.56]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2007B3A6A87 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:48:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zrtphxs1.corp.nortel.com (zrtphxs1.corp.nortel.com [47.140.202.46]) by zrtps0kp.nortel.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id n7R3mTK17186 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 03:48:29 GMT
Received: from zrtphx5h0.corp.nortel.com ([47.140.202.65]) by zrtphxs1.corp.nortel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 26 Aug 2009 23:48:14 -0400
Received: from [47.130.64.174] (47.130.64.174) by zrtphx5h0.corp.nortel.com (47.140.202.65) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.340.0; Wed, 26 Aug 2009 23:48:13 -0400
Message-ID: <4A9601FC.1090607@nortel.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 23:48:12 -0400
From: "Chris Lewis" <clewis@nortel.com>
Organization: Nortel
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090812 Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
References: <20090826180601.79333.qmail@simone.iecc.com> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0908261605410.13418@nber5.nber.org> <F32F76CE-829D-4C8C-A3B8-E5C344C14292@blighty.com>
In-Reply-To: <F32F76CE-829D-4C8C-A3B8-E5C344C14292@blighty.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Aug 2009 03:48:14.0096 (UTC) FILETIME=[3448F900:01CA26C9]
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: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 03:48:47 -0000

Steve Atkins wrote:

> I see this asserted a lot, but I don't really see much in the way of  
> plausible arguments to back it up.
> 
> If anything, some blacklist techniques are likely to be easier and  
> more effective on IPv6 than v4 for the obvious NAT / dynamic  
> assignment reasons.

Frankly, I don't think anything that earth shattering will occur, even 
if ipv6 takes over completely.

Undoubtably some techniques will work better, some about the same, and 
some won't work worth squat - they'll either evolve to work better, fade 
into meaninglessness, or just outright die.

It's not as if it hasn't happened before.  See much use of open relay 
DNSBLs anymore?  Thought not.