[112427] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Yahoo and their mail filters..
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matthew Petach)
Wed Feb 25 23:56:35 2009
In-Reply-To: <18854.5522.422745.897076@world.std.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 20:56:22 -0800
From: Matthew Petach <mpetach@netflight.com>
To: Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 2/25/09, Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com> wrote:
> On February 26, 2009 at 09:14 ops.lists@gmail.com (Suresh Ramasubramanian) wrote:
> > Well... If you think theres no value in the AOL or other feedback
> > loops and your network is clean enough without that, well then, dont
> > sign up to it and then bitch when all you get for your boutique
> > network with users who are by and large fellow geeks doesnt generate
> > any actual spam at all.
>
> Hey, I didn't bitch, I didn't say it was valueless, I didn't say any
> of this. Can't you make your point without amplifying and putting
> words in my mouth? It sounds to me like you just want to vent.
>
> I suggested that probably 99% of the false positives I see could be
> avoided by just waiting until there are two or more complaints from
> the same source before firing it back as spam.
But aren't the spam messages sufficiently randomized these days to
make it impossible to get *two* complaints about the same spam, since
the messages are all uniquified with randomized strings in them?
Matt
