[130741] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Network Operators Unite Against SORBS
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Tue Oct 12 12:49:35 2010
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikSXNeQkcph_xwf_DoY4NFNGP0ZqBZpOA7TQUTX@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 12:46:40 -0400
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Oct 12, 2010, at 12:25 PM, Scott Howard wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 5:35 AM, iHate SORBS <ihatesorbs@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>=20
>> 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.
>>=20
>=20
> What sort of changes are you suggesting? Suggesting a block unless =
they
> make undisclosed changes is simply asinine.
>=20
> I'm no fan of SORBS, but at the end of the day (ignoring the issues =
like
> they had last week) they do what they say they do.
>=20
> The problem with SORBS is not SORBS itself, but the mail admins that =
are
> stupid enough to use it - or at least stupid enough to use it as a =
straight
> blacklist (as opposed to a scoring blacklist). Start up a campaign =
against
> those if you like - perhaps an RBL of people who are using the SORBS =
RBL -
> but asking people to stop "routing" a DNS domain just because you =
don't like
> their clearly stated listing criteria simply isn't going to fly.
I kinda-sortta feel like many others who have posted here. This is a =
mail thing, not netops. Grow a pair and post under your own name. Is =
it even on-topic for NANOG? Etc.
I even started typing a message to the effect of: "even though I don't =
like SORBS, they should be allowed to publish a list and let others do =
as they please". But then I realized, that is all this anonymous person =
is asking. Or at least it could be.
If "iHate SORBS" wants to create a (another?) list of prefixes which =
should not be routed, and put SORBS on it, he (she?) should be allowed, =
just as SORBS should be allowed to have a list of mail servers SORBS =
doesn't like. Then each operator can decide whether to implement a =
block based on the list or not. Your network, your decision.
Of course, I fully expect no one to implement the block. But that is no =
reason to deny the ability to create the list.
Now, I feel like quoting Pastor Niem=F6ller so we can end this thread. =
:)
--=20
TTFN,
patrick
