On Tue, 4 Mar 2003, Lou Katz wrote:
your network and operation. Using these lists is a policy question for
the network, and I would not like some external, probably unaccountable
single point of policy.
For most purposes, network addresses are involuntarily put on various
blacklists. So it
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
blitz
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2003 7:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: spamcop.net?
Anyone having trouble getting to/ know of any issues with spamcop.net
today?
They seemed to have dropped off the radar from me
Thus spake Martin Hannigan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Not for nothing, but there's so much time wasted with all these
diversified spam systems.
Many of these systems have been shown to falsely flag non-spamming sites,
and the more reliable ones unfortunately don't catch a majority of spammers.
This
The only disadvantage I see, is a single point of failure, and a point for
concentration of attacks.
Marc
At 13:14 3/4/03 -0600, you wrote:
Thus spake Martin Hannigan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Not for nothing, but there's so much time wasted with all these
diversified spam systems.
Many of these
Thus spake Martin Hannigan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Not for nothing, but there's so much time wasted with all these
diversified spam systems.
Many of these systems have been shown to falsely flag non-spamming sites,
and the more reliable ones unfortunately don't catch a majority of spammers.
So true.
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 02:52:06PM -0500, blitz wrote:
The only disadvantage I see, is a single point of failure, and a point for
concentration of attacks.
Marc
Also, it centralizes POWER! There are many different lists with different
policies and criteria. Some are based on technically
Bravo, Lou! Anyway, one of the *virtues* of the Net has
always been its anarchic and chaotic nature. Trying
to set things into neat, regimented lines will get us
back to the OSI way of doing things. I revile spammers,
hate spam, and throw out tons of it; but I'd hate
regimentation and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Martin Hannigan) writes:
I applaud RBL, spamcop, etc., but without funding and consolidation, it's
another waste of offensive time that could be spent on a far more
effective defense.
i had no idea that MAPS was unfunded. do tell.
--
Paul Vixie
Anyone having trouble getting to/ know of any issues with spamcop.net today?
They seemed to have dropped off the radar from me...
No pings
No traceroute
but they still show registered at 216.127.43.89
Tnx
Marc
macronet.net
On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 09:41:21PM -0500, blitz wrote:
Anyone having trouble getting to/ know of any issues with spamcop.net today?
They seemed to have dropped off the radar from me...
No pings
No traceroute
but they still show registered at 216.127.43.89
One of my customers wrote
On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, blitz wrote:
Anyone having trouble getting to/ know of any issues with spamcop.net today?
They seemed to have dropped off the radar from me...
No pings
No traceroute
but they still show registered at 216.127.43.89
laptop ~]$ t 216.127.43.89 80
Trying
getting to/ know of any issues with spamcop.net
today?
They seemed to have dropped off the radar from me...
No pings
No traceroute
but they still show registered at 216.127.43.89
laptop ~]$ t 216.127.43.89 80
Trying 216.127.43.89...
Connected to 216.127.43.89 (216.127.43.89).
Escape
trouble getting to/ know of any issues with spamcop.net
today?
They seemed to have dropped off the radar from me...
No pings
No traceroute
but they still show registered at 216.127.43.89
laptop ~]$ t 216.127.43.89 80
Trying 216.127.43.89...
Connected to 216.127.43.89
13 matches
Mail list logo
