If the address-space owner won't police it's own property, there is no reason for the rest of the world to spend the time/effort to _selectively_ police it for them.
Exactly!!! If an SMTP server operator is not willing to police their server by implementing a list of approved email partners, then why should the rest of the Internet have to block outgoing port 25 connections? The buck needs to stop right where the problem is and that is on the SMTP servers that are promiscuously allowing almost any IP address to open an socket with them and inject email messages.
Amazon _might_ 'get a clue' if enough providers walled off the EC2 space, and they found difficulty selling cycles to people who couldn't access the machines to set up their compute applications.
Amazon might get a clue and sue companies who take such outrageously extreme action. Even if you are being slammed by millions of email messaged from Amazon address space, that is not justification for blocking all access to the space. It's a point problem on your mail server so leave the shotgun alone, and put an ACL blocking port 25 access to your mail server. I don't believe that horrendously broken email architecture and email operators with no vision, are sufficient justification for blocking new and innovative business models on the Internet. 10 months of the year, Amazon has 10 times as many servers as they need. They want to rent them out piecemeal and I applaud their innovation. Maybe their model is not perfect yet, but the solution to that is not to raise a lynch mob. Instead you should build a better cloud computing business and beat them that way. --Michael Dillon