[anti-abuse-wg] Hold time for abused address space - DNSChanger IP's reallocated
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hold time for abused address space - DNSChanger IP's reallocated
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hold time for abused address space - DNSChanger IP's reallocated
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Thor Kottelin
thor.kottelin at turvasana.com
Thu Aug 16 20:36:41 CEST 2012
> -----Original Message----- > From: anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net [mailto:anti-abuse-wg- > bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of lists at help.org > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 8:24 PM > To: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net > >http://www.ripe.net/ripe/groups/wg/anti-abuse > > I am aware of this but it simply uses another unidentified term > "spam." > Using one undefined term to define another undefined term is not a > standard. Email spam is universally defined as unsolicited bulk email. It must be extremely rare for someone to join an anti-abuse *working* group without knowing basic concepts such as this one. > I think some people > posting > large signatures for a 3-word reply is spam so should they be > blacklisted because I have that opinion? Yes, I think you should publish a DNSBL consisting of IP addresses from which people have sent email messages that contain signatures. That would help you realise that a DNSBL only becomes relevant if server administrators find it useful and that generalisations such as 'blacklist operators are $this-and-that' are gratuitous. -- Thor Kottelin http://www.anta.net/
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hold time for abused address space - DNSChanger IP's reallocated
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Hold time for abused address space - DNSChanger IP's reallocated
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]