[COLUG] another anti-spam link

[Rob Stampfli]

On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 08:19:14AM -0500, Angelo McComis wrote:
> I have a friend who has a small business, they have a 5-IP range of static
> DSL IP addresses with AT&T/SBC/whoever they are this week. Although they are
> "static" their reverse DNS shows as a bunch of numbers and ends with
> wotnoh.sbcglobal.net.  Per their TOS, I can host on it. But I wouldn't
> because upstream is only 512K, and for mail, I can't control the RDNS. It's
> used for in-office internet (desktop-purpose) only.

You can't control his rDNS, but he can.  I also have a friend with
a similar static 5-IP setup from AT&T/SBC/whatever-they-are-this-week,
and they put in CNAME/NS records pointing to our own DNS servers which
allow us complete control over our reverse lookup records.  This
request is becoming so common that even the 1st tier people understand
and can deal with it now, although we had to escallate things to get
it done right a few years ago (back when they were called Ameritech).
The upload bandwidth is indeed a limitation, but not the rDNS.

And, FWIW, these static IP addresses really seem to be assigned out
of a different pool -- we've had no problem with finding our IPs
listed in a dynamic-IP DNSBL database.

Rob

(Unfortunately, though, AT&T doesn't seem to be as good at undoing
these changes when the IP addresses are reassigned.  Our servers
still get hits for rDNS queries on IP addresses we once serviced,
but haven't owned for years.)