[35990] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AOL holes again.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Shawn McMahon)
Tue Mar 20 21:01:19 2001
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 20:58:45 -0500
From: Shawn McMahon <smcmahon@eiv.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20010320205845.E26397@eiv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="uCPdOCrL+PnN2Vxy"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20010321012318.5D59C35C42@berkshire.research.att.com>; from smb@research.att.com on Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 07:23:18PM -0600
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--uCPdOCrL+PnN2Vxy
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 07:23:18PM -0600, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
>=20
> the service delivery, and given how much load spam places on ISPs
> rejecting it is permissible as protecting the property of the service
> provider.
Since I get less spam in a normal day than I do regular mail, and I get
a lot more spam (and a lot more regular mail) than the average person,
I wouldn't want to try to fight from that position in court.
"But your honor, 5% of his email was spam, we had to kill that in order=20
to provide the service."
"But you were killing all his legitimate mail traffic from the 2nd-largest
ISP in the country."
"We had to, he got three spams from them last week."
Rings kinda hollow.
It gets worse if you killed what you thought was spam, and it was
SOLICITED commercial email he signed up for. I get quite a bit of that.
--uCPdOCrL+PnN2Vxy
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE6uArVEcl9bQ0RMt0RAq7FAJwONHPnEaTRAF/roqzqm4tDDW0jjgCdHa7V
674Zguhm4Dsdzo6JnELML3E=
=SZki
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--uCPdOCrL+PnN2Vxy--
