-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of Daniel Senie Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 6:43 PM To: JP Velders; Adam Jacob Muller Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Spam (un)blocking
At 06:10 PM 4/6/2005, JP Velders wrote:
Over here in "RIPE land" so to speak, several ISP's (most notably FIRST members) have put a lot of effort in getting 'IRT' objects in the RipeDB.
And this is MUCH appreciated. When trying to figure out where to send spam complaints, a network that's taken the time to put their abuse address in their records certainly appears to at least care, and so gets better treatment.
"Better" != "good." In past experience, - Since the Abuse POC was "abuse@" instead of "Lee.Howard@" it wasn't acceptable. - Because "abuse@" went to a 24x7 team, with an auto-responder, and (on advice of counsel and for scalability reasons) we did not reply to every complaint with a description of the action taken, it was assumed no action was taken. There's no pleasing some people, and it's a shame that not everyone can take the time to understand what filtering policies they're importing. YMMV Lee