[26756] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Fw: Administrivia: ORBS
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (danielle v.)
Sat Jan 15 00:08:44 2000
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 23:07:09 -0600 (CST)
From: "danielle v." <hvn@wildstar.net>
To: Paul Vixie <vixie@mibh.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <g3901scaz7.fsf@redpaul.mibh.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.05.10001142256060.8954-100000@venus.wildstar.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On 14 Jan 2000, Paul Vixie wrote:
> Date: 14 Jan 2000 18:41:48 -0800
> From: Paul Vixie <vixie@mibh.net>
> To: nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: Re: Fw: Administrivia: ORBS
>
>
>
> That's a misleading question. MAPS RSS doesn't probe for relay openness
> unless spam has been received from the relay in question. OTOH, if there
> is spam receipt and if the relay doesn't appear to be reachable, a human
> operator can decide that a firewall might be involved and block the relay
> in spite of our inability to test it.
>
> MAPS RSS never blocks whole address ranges, only /32's.
>
> ORBS is apparently blocking whole /16's belonging to Abovenet only because
> Abovenet refuses to have whole /16's probed for SMTP servers and then having
> each such server probed for relay openness. (I can't say as I blame them.)
> --
> Paul Vixie <vixie@mibh.net>
>
In effect, Above.net is (by filtering the ORBS probes) licensing every single IP
in their /16 to spam via the sordid and detailed means that ORBS works to
prevent.
This is an incorrect assumption? Please educate me as to how this is the
wrong way to view this.
I am under the assumption that the said block on Above.net/16 didn't go into
effect until ORBS itself was blocked - thus the resulting block on Above.net.
danielle v
