I'm getting seriously confused here. I thought that the open-relay issue was irelevent to MAPS. That MAPS only black-holed confirmed SPAM sites (a little tougher, but more granular, charter). Further, that it was ORBS that listed open-relay sites specifically, whether they were involved in a spam or not (unacceptable due to punishing potential anti-spammers for proliferating spam that never saw their systems). To me, these are two entirely different charters. If MAPS starts to look like ORBS then I will stop using MAPS. Can someone please clarify?
-----Original Message----- From: Robert Sharp [mailto:rsharp@appliedtheory.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 1:04 PM To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Stealth Blocking
I would like to make the point that I do run two mail servers and both a maps approved. Please don't tell me I don't know how to run a mail server. Again I am not discussing your ability , please don't poke fun at me. In fact I had some trouble with spam on one of them because someone was signing up a list I use for the owl networks mailing list. I infact installed MAPS to see if it helped the problem. It did not because the user didn't run an open relay site but rather a no confirmation email list. Would I be correct to assume they should be in the MAPS list too? As you can see sometime spam/annoying emails is not always sent throught an open relay but sometimes it's a problem with mailing lists..... What should maps do, start adding sites that act like this?
I am just making the point that if MAPS wasn't run by one person with total control maybe some of us "retards who don't know what we are doing" would be a bit more will to support the effort.
Rob
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2001 14:36:15 EDT, Robert Sharp said:
And if you use the MAPS list by your choice you are most definetly filtering out email or traffic for people who are legitimate. I know I have been filtered before. MAPS is using a very large hammer to kill a not so large bug.
Hmm.. you won't configure it correctly. RFC2505 is "Best Current Practice".
You get filtered because you won't configure it correctly.
You say you've been filtered *before* because you won't configure it correctly.
Yes, we *admit* we're using a large hammer. Bouncing your e-mail didn't get your attention. Maybe irate users will get your attention. But I am doubting it. -- Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech
-------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature