Reverse Dns Question...is it really necessary or not?

[Kevin Darcy]

brad at shub-internet.org wrote:

>Jim Reid <jim at rfc1035.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>It's not at all unreasonable for any service -- www, ftp. smtp, ssh,
>>etc -- to refuse to talk to clients that don't have their reverse DNS
>>in order.
>>    
>>
>
>Hell, ftp.uu.net was really the pioneer in this field, and they did so for
>good reason.  IMO, it's long since past time that we should do the same for
>mail.
>
Oh, really? Do you have all of your RP records up to date? All of your 
netblocks encoded RFC 1101 style? All of the LOC records in place? How 
about your WKS records? No? Then maybe my mail servers should reject 
your messages!

This is the Fighting SPAM via Forcing All Mail Senders to Jump Through 
Irrelevant DNS Hoops approach, and the mentality really amazes me 
sometimes. Reverse DNS was never intended as a SPAM-vs-not-SPAM 
authentication mechanism; how can it be considered anything better than 
naked opportunism to use it as such?

                                                                         
                                             - Kevin