[95849] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: GoDaddy's abuse procedures [was: ICANNs role [was: Re: On-going
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chris L. Morrow)
Sat Apr 7 16:55:32 2007
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2007 20:54:18 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Chris L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow@verizonbusiness.com>
In-reply-to:
<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAKTyXRN5/+lGvU59a+P7CFMBAN6gY+ZG84BMpVQcAbDh1IQAAAATbSgAABAAAAB0PdOF9sq8TKQ775VDo9/aAQAAAAA=@iname.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007, Frank Bulk wrote:
>
> While you have your friend's ear, ask him why they maintain a spam policy of
> blocking complete /24's when:
> a) the space has been divided into multiple sub-blocks and assigned to
> different companies, all well-documented and queryable in ARIN
> b) there have been repeated pleas to whitelist a certain IP in separate
> sub-block that is only being punished for the behavior of others in a
> different sub-block.
because it's go-daddy's policy not yours and their customers aren't upset
enough about 'broken' email to force a change?
If you are a go-daddy customer you ought to speak up if this policy really
does affect you.
-Chris
