[17920] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: RBL Update (Re: Lets go vixie!! rbl)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steve Hultquist)
Wed Jun 17 10:41:01 1998
From: "Steve Hultquist" <ssh@HSAcorp.net>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 10:27:29 -0600
In-Reply-To: <Pine.UW2.3.95.980616045001.9287C-100000@dns.sersol.com>
> On Tue, 16 Jun 1998, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>
> I think the operational issue is who uses RBL, not that it
> exists. When a customer purchases e-mail services from an ISP there
> should be no blocking unless it was specifically part of the contract.
> For instance, I believe it would be a bad thing for an "aol" or a
> "hotmail" to use the RBL to filter mail. Basically it boils down to
> content filtering being bad for an ISP.
>
> --------- 8< snip
>
> If an ISP advertises that it is anti-spam and participates in the RBL then
> the customer knows up front that the ISP is filtering known spamblocks.
> The ISP can even put it in their policy documents/user access agreements.
> If they (the customers) don't like it they can select an ISP who lets all
> the sewage pass through. As long as you are up front about it the
> customer has the choice to use them or not.
>
> --
> James D. Wilson
> netsurf@sersol.com
Some of us would even market this as competitive advantage! ;-)
--
Steve Hultquist, VP Engineering High Speed Access
providing high-speed Internet access Boulder, Colorado
mailto:ssh@HSAcorp.net +1.303.581.0800 http://www.HSAcorp.net/
