Recent issue with SORBS

[Ken A]

am.lists wrote:
> I would prefix the suffix with OT, but this list seems pretty
> forgiving for topics that shift a bit.
> 
> Our SMTP server (outbound) has an IP that is in a block that was
> assigned to us (we own about 40 IPs in the entire /24).
> 
> Now, as the result of some other other customer's behavior, we have
> hoops to jump through to get off of that list.
> 
> We contacted SORBS:  They said that "it's up to [us] to choose where
> we want to be hosted, and we're currently hosting in the Internet
> equivalent of a crack slum"

That's the killer right there. You will find yourself listed by SORBS, 
and probably re-listed even if you pay the 'donation to charity' that 
they require in some cases. SORBS and others tend to list on /24 or 
larger blocks, probably just for ease of maintenance. Do a reverse 
lookup on all the IPs in your range. If they come back as 'xxx' 
'marketing' and 'warez' or similar, move your hosting. It's not worth 
the pain. :-\

Ken A.
Pacific.Net


> We contacted our Host Facility: They said that SORBS is essentially an
> extortionist organization. They ask you to pay a fine ($50) to delist
> the block. As a large organization, sometimes customers do send a
> message that is classified as spam. As a responsible hosting provider,
> they deal with them accordingly. Specifically, if one of the
> blacklists notifies them of an infraction, they give the customer one
> warning. There is no second warning and their account is turned off.
> 
> So. We have two very different points of view. Who's right? Does
> anyone else have any experience with this sort of thing one way or the
> other?
> 
> I believe we have our single-IP whitelisted on SORBS for now, but it
> sounds like this is an ugly, ugly situation.
> 
> Angelo