On 24 Oct 2016, at 16:54, [email protected] wrote:
So you block all of AS14061 because there supposedly is a spammer in the block?
The relevant TXT record in that DNSBL asserts 276 "abusers" on AS14061 in the past week. Eyeballing the visible routes for AS14061, that seems to be something like 0.2% of the advertised addresses.
I grumblingly agreed when Wietse said it was proper to block a specific IP when only one user was spamming, but this seems excessive.
It is, which is why UCEPROTECT and especially their "Level 3" list are not widely trusted as a basis for absolute banning. I don't recall seeing evidence that *any* of their lists are used as outright banning criteria by any sites with a significant number of users outside of German-speaking Europe.
