[vox-tech] smtp question - blocked ip

[Joel Baumert]

On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 05:30:49PM -0800, Ted Deppner wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 12:25:47AM -0800, Joel Baumert wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 07:24:02PM -0800, Ted Deppner wrote:
[...]
> > effect that is what is happening in some cases where a naive user signs
> > up for this blocking service and can no longer do business with a 
> > company that happens to be on an ISP that happens to sell software that
> > some RBL decides is spamware.  It isn't as clear cut as you are trying 
> > to make it.
> 
> Sure, in the micro case it's not that simple, but in the macro case it is.
> If there's a real problem, the public will respond, and intelligent
> vendors will too.

This is fine if you have a choice of vendors.  In some places, if you
want broadband you only have one choice.  If communicating with some 
people is not possible through that broadband provider, you have no
choices and no real option.  I guess you could move :-)...

In Davis, Pacific Bell owns the wires to my house, so I have to deal
with them on some level.  At some point AT&T might put in broadband
or some wireless service might open up, but they are not there yet.
I have the option of Omsoft thankfully, so I don't think I have Pete's
problem.  I have talked to people who only have PacBell as an option.

Where do you complain?  PacBell? Not... The PUC?  No that isn't going
to work... DSL is a premium service.  AT&T?  Hmmm.... They will
contact you when broadband is available in your area.  WinFirst?
Doh... They are out of money.  Wireless?  Last time I looked I needed
a 30' antenna and that would violate my CCNRs... etc, etc, etc...

> Do you eat at every fast food restuarant?  I'm sure there are some you
> avoid... bad food, bad parking, bad service.  Is there anything wrong with
> that?  Do "bad food" places still exist?  Sure, but they're not as
> effective as "good food" places.
> 
> Similarly, savvy netizens should probably want to avoid being put in a
> situation where collateral damage could affect them.  How many still use
> Windows and suffer the collateral damage of crashes?  Would you go back
> now that you have linux?  Why would you want to be on an ISP that is spam
> friendly?

Because you don't want a dialup connection or you signed a long term
contract with someone that looked ok and now is by someones estimation
spam friendly...

> I see nothing inherantly wrong with these things... it's your choice to
> place your dollars at these places, and enjoy the benifits and suffer the
> consequenses.
> 
> > So far :-).  I suspect more and more people are going to move to permission
> > based messaging for their personal email where you have to give someone
> > credentials that they need to present before you accept any correspondence.
> > This is already happening with instant messagers and this will be eventually
> > called email.
> 
> I too think whitelists will become ubiquitous at some point... probably
> the next killer app.
[...]

Yep... A little cryptography and this could be slick.  Though you still
end up with what amounts to a key distribution problem.

Joel