[130730] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Network Operators Unite Against SORBS
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Tue Oct 12 11:12:00 2010
To: iHate SORBS <ihatesorbs@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 12 Oct 2010 05:35:11 PDT."
<AANLkTin+RwfBHuCss-6AxgJPytvefqa40x_qLGo7+PZt@mail.gmail.com>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 11:11:12 -0400
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1286896272_8577P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010 05:35:11 PDT, iHate SORBS said:
> I am calling on all Network Operators to stand up and stop routing
> dnsbl.sorbs.net until that time they can commit to making real changes.
You *do* realize your beef isn't with SORBS, it's with the mail operators that
are using that as part of their input when deciding whether or not to accept
mail, right? And they'll probably continue using it, because they're not the
ones who feel the pain of being listed incorrectly. That won't change
unless you can make a clear and logical business case of why using SORBS is
counter-productive for *them*. That probably will mean that you have to
demonstrate that your mail (and all the other SORBS false-positives) is worth
more to their organization than the benefits they get from using SORBS (namely,
a reduction in the amount of abusive mail they get). Unfortunately, unless
you're trying to e-mail them a purchase order for an amount that's bigger than
their anti-abuse team's budget, that probably will be a hard case to make.
Further discussion is probably better suited for mailops or spam-l.
--==_Exmh_1286896272_8577P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFMtHqQcC3lWbTT17ARAqmgAJ91TVRDRwgP1e7t0G4iEZ6IjiT4IgCgsbFz
tJ2NjYjIE5KlNGjIVfMMXsQ=
=qrKh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1286896272_8577P--
