[138889] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: SORBS contact?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (TR Shaw)
Tue Mar 22 19:16:32 2011
From: TR Shaw <tshaw@oitc.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D892BF4.4@tiedyenetworks.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 19:16:28 -0400
To: Mike <mike-nanog@tiedyenetworks.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 22, 2011, at 7:08 PM, Mike wrote:
> On 03/22/2011 03:58 PM, Paul Graydon wrote:
>> On 03/22/2011 12:24 PM, Franck Martin wrote:
>>> +1
>>>=20
>>> They know the challenges, aware of the issues and I have seen some
>>> progress.
>>=20
>> I'm glad to hear that, one less extortion racket on the 'net is no =
bad
>> thing. They might do better by rebranding though. SORBS has one heck =
of
>> an amount of negative karma for them to get past.
>>=20
>=20
> Competently managed and with even a modicum of responsiveness, SORBS =
could be redeemed. But yeah, they should get a new name, SORBS is =
tainted in my book.
SORBS is tainted worldwide. You should hear the the laughing and =
negative comments about them at MAAWG and at other conferences let alone =
all the users that dumped them and all the legit ISPs that they held for =
ransom.
If they have gotten rid of Michelle and have gotten new management and =
gotten a new attitude they should run that up the flag pole so that =
everyone will know. And, I agree they need to rebrand if they are =
really dedicated to a change in operations. Then, they face the long =
term to get back their reputation.
