From: mouss (mlist.onlyfree.fr)
Date: Sun Feb 25 2007 - 19:20:15 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Steven F Siirila wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 11:50:11AM +0100, Erwan David wrote:
>
>> Le Thu 22/02/2007, Robert Felber disait
>>
>>
>>> Notes:
>>>
>>> 1) personally I suggest to exlcude PBL because you hand the decison whether
>>> to accept dynamic clients (such real clients exist) to spamhaus the ISP of the
>>> client in question. PBL may be included in scoring systems, though.
>>> PBL stands for Policy Blocking List, more info http://www.spamhaus.org/pbl/
>>>
>> And PBL lists many BIG blocks (a friend of mine found a /11 in it...)
>> which is not reasonable.
>>
>
> Sure it is, provided that the owner of the netblock in question does not
> allow outbound e-mail by "policy" (hence the "P" in PBL).
>

well, for one, they say:

"Additional IP address ranges are added and maintained by the Spamhaus
PBL Team, ..."

This would hardly be described as "the owner of the netblock does not
allow outbound e-mail by policy".

secundo, if the said policy of the said owner is good, why doesn't he
enforce it (block outbound stmp is one among other possibilities).

If the ISP blocks outbound smtp, the ISP is held responsible for this
blocking, and can thus be sued by (legitimate) customers. if an external
party is used, nobody is responsible anymore, and legitimate customers
get hurt with no possibility to get back their money.

> We block anyone listed in the PBL.
>
>
your site, your rules.

what would be interesting is to see what false positives are caused by
the PBL. if anyone can share such information...

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]