Should everyone have the freedom to police their own network the way
they want, or should everyone police their network the way *you* want?
If the latter, why *you* instead of, say, the way Donald Trump wants? He
is the president after all.
On 18/08/25 13:42, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
Everyone that has a network, everyone that runs an organisation that
provides and registers resources - netblocks, asns, domains ..
everyone that insists it isn’t their problem it is somebody else’s.
--srs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* [email protected] <[email protected]>
*Sent:* Monday, August 18, 2025 4:42:46 PM
*To:* North American Network Operators Group <[email protected]>;
Suresh Ramasubramanian via NANOG <[email protected]>
*Cc:* Suresh Ramasubramanian <[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: Worsening google service reputation and abuse
I'm curious who you think is the internet police.
On 18 August 2025 04:18:18 CEST, Suresh Ramasubramanian via NANOG
<[email protected]> wrote:
It isn’t just cops it is all the various people and orgs in the
ecosystem who are all convinced they aren’t the internet police. --srs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Thomas via NANOG <[email protected]> Sent:
Monday, August 18, 2025 7:46:01 AM To: [email protected]
<[email protected]> Cc: Michael Thomas <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Worsening google service reputation and abuse On
8/17/25 5:15 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian via NANOG wrote:
Real economics as a factor has been studied quite a lot -
check for papers by Vern Paxson, Stefan Savage etc and you’ll
find some going back 20+ years. A lot of the real economic
impact just doesn’t lie in technical solutions though.
There is a lot of damage done for tons of things. Yet, Visa still
exists. Fraud exists. It's a cost of doing business. It's just
petty crime. Nothing is going to stop it. That is what the joke
is. The cops don't give a flying fuck about this, and never will.
They don't care about anything if it doesn't involve donuts. Mike
From: Marc Binderberger via NANOG <[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, 17 August 2025 at 5:37 PM To: North American
Network Operators Group <[email protected]> Cc: Marc
Binderberger <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Worsening
google service reputation and abuse On Sat, 16 Aug 2025
17:24:04 -0700, Michael Thomas via NANOG wrote:
Barry has been going on about this idea for decades, I
think. It wouldn't work then, it won't work now.
Until some idea suddenly works. Or an old idea becomes
feasible. Frankly, many things we take for granted today would
not exist with that "won't work" attitude. The better question
(imho) to Barry is: how is your idea different from the
already existing proposals? Barry has a reasonable theory -
that the economics of spamming is brittle - but it is just
that: a theory. And most of the (failed) proposals seem
academic and avoid actual "costs" in terms of money. Or raise
the real-world costs for everyone, if you need CPU cycles to
participate in the email system. So Barry stepping out of this
box and suggesting real economics as a factor is not
unreasonable. I am not sure if there are more concrete details
though (?).
Nobody can put up a coherent argument for why the current
cat and mouse situation isn't the acceptable balance,
I guess "acceptable" can be defined as: Hey, I can always get
a free personal account with gmail. And as a company I pay
Google or Microsoft, save money on my IT staff. And good luck
blocking "me" (i.e. Google, Microsoft). Maybe a problem if you
are in the email business, fine with me, my domain is a
private hobby. In fact, for all their "flaws", seeing the
insanity of the know-it-all experts (some here on the list) I
think I prefer Google requesting some reputation steps and a
webpage explaining it. The alternative: being blocked for
"Excessive Spam - Come back when you have fixed it". No
further details. Sure, private domain, private VPS, no
BL/score listing that I can find ... fortunately that blocking
was just a Cc: to one of my posts, so I could not care less.
The acceptable state of the mail system today! So there you
may have an argument: that the increasing number of
mechanisms, lists, tricks make the mail system less work-able
and more broken. But I have no crystal ball, if email will
finally break or will keep going - I don't know. Would be just
sad if it breaks (but I have a gmail account as a backup ;-) Marc
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/SAZSIVJFOO2HJX4JPDFXXZZBLT3ZBKQ5/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/DCKS64CINBGHI7M5I6IHMJ7NVCJLTBLG/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/G7FDDNH3JPETIG2UGUL34POYPDO2BDGR/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/Z54AAQL64TAPICROM3UEYHCOD73FQTWV/
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/SQC2E3E2Y4Z3H44QANB6Z773FMAYDD33/
