[anti-abuse-wg] The well-behaved ISP's role in spamfight

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 22:18:49 +0100
peter h <peter at hk.ipsec.se> wrote:
> There is not any req that all customers always should be forced to use
> ISP relays, the default behaviour might be to use ISP relays, and
> to have DHCP given address. But for an extra service one could 
> obtain a fixed address, and as extra service, use port 25.  The main 
> point is to have those "unaware" users, whos computers might be
> stolen, prevented. They won't notice, and they don't get harmed.
> 
there used to be free (and reasonably well maintained) open lists of
dynamic IPv4 ranges. Since everyone started selling (or renting) data,
getting a free (and maintained) list of dynamic ranges, is difficult,
if not impossible - anyone know of any such free list?

> Spam from a fixed ip or range is much easier to detact and correct
> then spam from any box that happens to get an DHCP lease.
> Flexibility and service is the keyword here.
>
in a perfect world only email servers would be sending email. In our
world someone's Android phone could also be an email server & client 
and some "ISP"  loves using dynamic ranges as excuse for poorly
maintained or non responsive abuse systems (or policy enforcement)
  
> Also, to have a AUP that gives the ISP right to disconnect or block
> offenders is importent, and also that the customer has right to
> service. Any aggreement is twofold, both rights and obligations, like
> in society in general.
> 
> I'm glad that spam is recignised as the problem it is and hope a
> renewed activity to claim back the bandwitdh and storage space the
> spammer has taken from us.
> 
> Yours
> 
>