AOL Bans Mail From DSL-Hosted Servers

kmself writes "As first reported at linux-elitists by Aaron Sherman, and with a demonstration of the denial at zIWETHEY, AOL has begun blocking mailservers identified with residential DSL lines as an anti-spam measure, apparently heedless of the huge collateral damage this move imposes (and guess who can't send mail to Mom...). This action was unannounced, and has received virtually no coverage, spare an oblique mention at News.com. It also violates SMTP RFCs, as Aaron points out, not to mention the 'good neighbor' conventions of Internet communications. Mail to AOL's postmaster is also bounced -- this is RFC-ignorant. I strongly recommend that as a compensatory measure, non-AOL MTAs be configured to deny all incoming mail from AOL's domain."

Comments

It's their network.

[cperciva]

If AOL doesn't want to accept your mail, that's their choice. It's their network, and their mail servers. Of course, when AOL customers find that they can't receive any email, AOL might lose business.

Like all other spam blocking attempts, there will be collateral damage. They try to keep their customers happy, and the market decides if they succeeded.

Re:It's their network.

[Boss, Pointy Haired]

Yes, but have they told their subscribers?

You don't know you haven't got what you didn't get.

Re:Good move

[SWroclawski]

I currently don't have mod points or you and others who have said the same thing would be modded up.

There's no RFC that says you have to accept mail from *everyone*. You're free to bounce mail to whomever you like.

As to why this is an effective technique:

1) Most of these "home servers" don't have a PTR record at all.

2) Those that do, almost NEVER have one pointing to the domain they claim to be recieving for.

3) All these residential users should be using their ISP as a relay. That's what the ISP is there for.

4) Since there's no reason for them to need to send it out *not* through the ISP as a relay host, the majority of these users are spammers or just ignorant. In the first case, it's good to block them. In the second, maybe they will get a clue.

I'm generally against crippling services on the ISP end, but I've even thought that maybe it's high time that ISPs do what AOL does, and block outbound port 25. Incomming is another story, but as the parent and I have pointed out- the residential users should be using their ISP's mail servers as relay hosts.

- Serge Wroclawski

Re:Privatized mail

[LamerX]

I dont' understand why everyone is so down on the USPS. I've never seen packages arrive late. My mail, which sits out in an unlocked box on the street, never gets messed with, it always arrives at its destination, and it seems to get there pretty quick. I mean, which method do you notice EVERY company sends out bills? I've never seen anyone send bills via UPS or FedEx, even though according to many people the USPS sucks....

Re:Privatized mail

[EvilTwinSkippy]

The can't tweak it too hard.

According to the constitution, by law Congress must provide a postal system. Short of a constitutional ademendment, they are just a lawsuit away from any "reform" ideas being thrown out.

And frankly our postal system is a bargain. Try sending 2 oz letter 3500 miles for $0.36 in any other country in the world.

Now if you only had a telephone and a broadband service like that...