discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org
Subject: Discuss mailing list
List archive
- From: Jeff Taylor <shdwdrgn AT sourpuss.net>
- To: discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org
- Subject: Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist
- Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2017 15:03:31 -0600
- Authentication-results: mx2.computerrehab.us; dmarc=none header.from=sourpuss.net
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.0 mx2.computerrehab.us 9752C2D4CF
Well I got my whitelist access issue sorted out. Funny thing is I think I had an open resolver running on the old ISP as well. Now it's working properly so it will resolve any of my local domains for everyone, but only resolve recursively to those who are whitelisted. That should also resolve my issues with spamhaus and anyone else who wants to pretend like they are the guardians of the internet.
The filter has been pulled from ns1.co.us.dns.opennic.glue, it is once again fully resolving the internet.
I agree that we should not be bullied by entities such as spamhaus. I mean, they're a great filter, I use the myself on my mail servers, but they are certainly NOT going to stop the spam problem by blacklisting all opennic servers. However you have to keep in mind that opennic is run by *volunteers*. We don't all have money to pay for both our private connections AND a hosted server, and some concessions should be made since this whole project started out on people's home servers and many of us still run services from there.
Whitelisting is certainly an option though. That's what I do (or *thought* I was doing) and when it's working properly it should prevent any such issues from outside entities blocking us. However perhaps it is time to reconsider a 'filtered' option? A number of servers run on multiple ports... what if we had a domain blacklist distributed through the API that would allow people to run filtered DNS queries on port 53, but allow unrestricted queries through an alternate port? For that matter, I could even see running whitelisting on port 53 and unrestricted access on an alternate port. There are any number of possibilities available here, so I don't think we should discount any options that allow our members to continue running their public servers without harassment.
On 08/02/2017 02:16 PM, Al Beano wrote:
Why does it matter? Spamhaus can make as many lists as they want, OpenNIC
doesn't answer to them.
If they're going to do this, I think it's best to concede that you can't run
DNS and mail on a single server — I'd rather that than be bullied by Spamhaus.
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, (continued)
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Calum McAlinden, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Daniel Quintiliani, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Daniel Quintiliani, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Calum McAlinden, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Daniel Quintiliani, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/03/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/04/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/04/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Amunak, 08/05/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/06/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Amunak, 08/05/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/04/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/04/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Daniel Quintiliani, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Al Beano, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Calum McAlinden, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Verax, 08/03/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/03/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Verax, 08/03/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Calum McAlinden, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/02/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, opennic, 08/23/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Wil, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jonah Aragon, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Verax, 08/25/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jonah Aragon, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Jeff Taylor, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Wil, 08/24/2017
- Re: [opennic-discuss] letit2 [.] bit blacklist, Calum McAlinden, 08/02/2017
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.