[20991] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Despamming wholesale dialup
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven J. Sobol)
Fri Oct 30 17:24:19 1998
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 16:30:29 -0500
From: "Steven J. Sobol" <sjsobol@nacs.net>
To: Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com>
Cc: Scott Gifford <sgifford@tir.com>, Harold Willison <harold@agis.net>,
"Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19981030135218.00a62900@odie.av8.com>; from Dean Anderson on Fri, Oct 30, 1998 at 01:52:19PM -0500
On Fri, Oct 30, 1998 at 01:52:19PM -0500, Dean Anderson wrote:
> One problem is that the wholesale provider may not have permission to do
> this. You must obtain permission from a party to the communication prior to
> interfering with it, unless it qualifies as an abuse.
Don't start again, Dean.
> You should be aware that the pro-spammers have a bill in Congress to
> explicitly define spam as a legitimate activity, ie not an abuse. It will
> likely be passed in this session.
Wrong. It died. Unfortunately, the telephone anti-slamming bill died with
it - the spam rider was attached to the anti-slamming bill.
>I tried to tell people a year and a half
> ago that spammers were closely associated with an advertising lobby that
> would be effective on this is issue, and that they needed to try a more
> reasonable approach. But they insisted "I was wrong".
You're still wrong. The DMA and its members seem to be adopting a wait-and-
see attitude, although they seem to be moving towards action...
> So "Spam fighting" is now a lost cause
Whatever.
> which should not be discussed on Nanog anyway.
Which doesn't stop you from whining about spamfighters every few months
anyhow.
--
Steve Sobol [sjsobol@nacs.net]
Part-time Support Droid [support@nacs.net]
NACS Spaminator [abuse@nacs.net]
Spotted on a bumper sticker: "Possum. The other white meat."
