[121325] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: SORBS on autopilot?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ronald Cotoni)
Fri Jan 15 10:53:15 2010
In-Reply-To: <4B508718.30606@sorbs.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 10:52:10 -0500
From: Ronald Cotoni <setient@gmail.com>
To: Michelle Sullivan <matthew@sorbs.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Michelle Sullivan <matthew@sorbs.net> wro=
te:
> telmnstr@757.org wrote:
>>>
>>> Did SORBS really cause you that much pain?
>>
>> Yes. We purchased colo space for some systems that didn't need high clas=
s
>> of service (mostly development systems.) The IP space in a former lifeti=
me
>> was a dialup pool for analog modems.
>>
>> We of course changed the reverse DNS entries, and did the normal request
>> with SORBS. Nothign really happened. I started looking into it, and find=
ing
>> stories of people doing the mandatory $90 donation to get express attent=
ion,
>
> ...and at this point we know the poster (like a fair few other in this
> thread) is either talking c**p or mixing SORBS with some other list. =A0T=
here
> is NO donation required for non spam listings (a DUHL entry is not a spam
> listing) and $90 is plucked from thin air... a =A0cursory look at the SOR=
BS
> website will attest to that.
>
>
> Michelle
>
> Note: The original poster was noted to have never opened a ticket @ SORBS=
by
> one of the staff.. =A0I haven't verified that personally, but it does fol=
low a
> common theme.. =A0People complain about listings and have subsequently be=
en
> found to have *not* requested delisting through the correct channel (the
> SORBS support system)... =A0I wonder how many would get this sort of resp=
onse
> (a firey NANOG thread) if they complained their ADSL was broken to the
> yellowpages sales line...?!?!?
>
>
At the same time, I never hear this about spamhaus or outblaze. Go
figure :( Maybe your system is too confusing and you might want to
take a survey and revamp it to something a bit more functional.
