[7706] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: karl and paul, expostulating
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dima Volodin)
Thu Feb 20 11:23:06 1997
From: dvv@dvv.ru (Dima Volodin)
To: Daniel Simms <dsimms@alink.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 16:17:22 GMT
In-Reply-To: <x5u3n8ggx9.fsf@ba.alink.net>
On 19 Feb 1997 21:55:30 -0800, you wrote:
>>>>>> "KD" == Karl Denninger <karl@Mcs.Net> writes:
>
> KD> or a 421 error, which keeps the spam at the source (loading the
> KD> spammers mailserver -- a GOOD thing!)
>
>Are you joking? There's not a spammer alive that uses sendmail or
>something that would similiarly requeue on temporary failure.
>
> KD> Much more elegant, in my opinion.
>
>Assuming that 'sendspam' would actually maintain a queue.
>
>Paul's solution has its own elegance: raising the price for allowing
>antisocial behavior from bounced email to partial loss of
>connectivity. But like Paul said, raising the stakes like that just
>invites someone to try and one up him.
What's so elegant about that if a spammer with elementary knowledge
about SMTP and DNS can easily bounce his stuff off of any of the
thousands of unsuspecting hosts and/or use unsuspecting forwarding
name servers in the slave mode?
>Daniel Simms There is more than one way to burn a book.
Dima
