Re: [OT] Re: Feature request - Subtree checkouts

On Tue, 11 Apr 2007, Christer Weinigel wrote:

Linus Torvalds [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

It's also possible to just not accept mail if the reverse lookup indicates
that the sending IP address is a dynamic address, which you can sometimes
see from the hostname. I would suggest you *not* name your hosts to
contain a lot of numbers and the string "dhcp", for example ;)

That would be a very bad idea I think.  Doing that would lose quite a
lot of small companies and individuals such as me that run a mail
server but are unable to get the ISP to change the reverse DNS.  For
example I do have a fixed IP, but have an reverse DNS pointer which
looks like 1-2-3-4-5a.foo.bar.bostream.se.

I am in the same situation.  I also have three domains.  Which one do I pick?  I can't afford to get an individual ip address for each.  Virtual servers on a single ip also will have similar problems.

Forcing everybody to send mail through their ISP (and I'm not even
sure if my ADSL subscription includes such a service) would be a big
loss.  First of all its a philosophical thing, I think that it's very
important that small shops or individuals should be able to control
the services they need, the internet is supposed to be peer to peer.
Second because the ISP's mess up a lot more often than I do, for
example Telia, one of the largest ISPs in Sweden have been having
massive mail server problems during the last week which I'm happily
unaffected by.

My ISP only reciently started to think about using greylisting.  They route all their mail through a filter service that I do not trust.  (Too many false positives.  I also expect that all this talk about "forking children" would get me on some list somewhere.)

I have more experience running mail servers than the people at my ISP. (Not their fault.  They are young.)

-- 
"Invoking the supernatural can explain anything, and hence explains nothing."
                  - University of Utah bioengineering professor Gregory Clark