[69762] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Lazy network operators - NOT
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Donelan)
Mon Apr 19 18:38:31 2004
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 18:37:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
To: Paul Vixie <vixie@vix.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <g34qrf62wi.fsf@sa.vix.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, Paul Vixie wrote:
> two things, though: (1) you'll never get those things fixed and (we both
> know it), (2) so you'd better prepare for the inevitability of widespread
> filtering against your DSL/Cable blocks (whether you talk to me or not.)
Paul, where have you been? There is already widespread filtering of
DSL/Cable/Dialup blocks. Some DSL/Cable/Dialup providers even provide
daily/weekly feeds to various third-party list operators and other service
providers so they can more accurately mantain lists of dynamic addresses.
Accurate lists of dynamic addresses are encouraged.
Or are you suggesting the SPEWS approach of blacklisting everything.
DSL/Cable/Dialup users won't be able to send e-mail directly from those
addresses, and in addition, do you intend to go further and also black
list all the provider's e-mail servers and static addresses and dedicated
addresses so any provider which has DSL/Cable/Dialup pools can't have
any e-mail servers on any address block registered to the same provider.
