[120338] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Arrogant RBL list maintainers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michelle Sullivan)
Wed Dec 16 18:14:51 2009
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:14:00 +0100
From: Michelle Sullivan <matthew@sorbs.net>
In-reply-to: <20091216174550.GC7799@burnout.tpb.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Niels Bakker wrote:
> * matthew@sorbs.net (Michelle Sullivan) [Wed 16 Dec 2009, 17:41 CET]:
> [..]
>> ..... The obvious answer is if you have signed SLAs then you should
>> adhere to those SLAs as a minimum and give better service if time
>> allows... Hands up those who have an SLA (free or not) with an RBL
>> maintainer... I don't expect to see any hands...
>
> How much would you charge a company for it to get taken off
> immediately after it hits your list?
>
Nothing. I don't believe in such a practice because it would be fraught
with the danger of being accused of pandering to spammers, extortion and
blackmail. Its bad enough requiring a donation to charity for expedited
delisting of just the spam DB entries.
As for an SLA the only type I would consider (hypothetically) is a "we
will provide a phone/pager number for you to call" or "we will answer
your ticket by email within x hours" type SLA. In either case there
would be a clause the states clearly that the SLA does not provide any
sort of guaranteed delisting.
Michelle
PS: Have been asked to take this off list by someone who didn't identify
themselves as a list manager, but they did it politely and I respect
that, so all future replies from me to this thread will be offlist.
Please feel free to reply to me *offlist*. Thanks.
