Re: several messages

[der Mouse <[e-mail]>]

>> Furthermore, you appear to think that all DNSBLs are reactive in
>> nature.  This is not true; there are at least a few DNSBLs that
>> proactively list "large indistinguishable pool" addresses.  In at
>> least one case, the pools are submitted to them by the providers
>> that run the pools.  Using such a list puts a substantial crimp in
>> direct-to-MX spamming.
> And the providers lie in those list.  [...port-25-block removal which
> doesn't remove from the DNSL data...]

Time to switch providers, I'd say.  But in any case, that's the fault
of the provider in question, not of the DNSBL, or of DNSBLs as a class.
The DNSBL is doing just what it told its users it would do - list
blocks reported to them by providers - and your issue, as reasonable
and serious as it is, is between the provider and you, or the provider
and the DNSBL, depending on and who's made what claims to whom and
which way you prefer to squint your mind.

Unless that _isn't_ what the DNSBL tells its users it will do....

/~\ The ASCII				  Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML		[e-mail]
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf