Re: Atrivo/Intercage: Now Only 1 Upstream
So in cases like this where the community appears to agree that there's a consistently bad apple, what's preventing everyone from simply nullrouting the netblocks in question and imposing the death penalty? Sorry if this seems naive, but if no legitimate purpose is shown it seems like the obvious thing to do. Maybe they could still *send* packets, but nothing would ever get back to them. _H*
hobbit@avian.org (*Hobbit*) writes:
So in cases like this where the community appears to agree that there's a consistently bad apple, what's preventing everyone from simply nullrouting the netblocks in question and imposing the death penalty?
http://www.spamhaus.org/drop/ seems to have atrivo on it.
Sorry if this seems naive, but if no legitimate purpose is shown it seems like the obvious thing to do. Maybe they could still *send* packets, but nothing would ever get back to them.
legitimacy is in the mind of the beholder of course. -- Paul Vixie
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 12:47:26 -0000, *Hobbit* said:
So in cases like this where the community appears to agree that there's a consistently bad apple, what's preventing everyone from simply
"what's preventing everyone"? Geez Hobbit, I *know* you've been around long enough to know better than that :) We can't get a clear majority of providers to do BCP38, you expect them to apply a null route? And then to know to *remove* it once the problem withers up? ;)
On 16/09/2008, at 10:17 PM, *Hobbit* wrote:
So in cases like this where the community appears to agree that there's a consistently bad apple, what's preventing everyone from simply nullrouting the netblocks in question and imposing the death penalty?
Dunno - but something did occur to me this morning on the drive into work: Maybe there's another approach to this problem. Maybe, rather than having the antispam/virus vendors do non-real world lab tests we could get them all to donate some kit to whomever is the unlucky transit- provider du jour and see how well it works providing a nice clean feed and who's better at it? ;-) MMC -- Matthew Moyle-Croft Internode/Agile Peering and Core Networks
Looks like PIE got themselves a /22 in spamhaus - http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/sbl.lasso?query=SBL67906 _________quote__________ 206.223.144.0/22 is listed on the Spamhaus Block List (SBL) 17-Sep-2008 09:57 GMT | SR04 Pacific Internet Exchange LLC. NT Technology ; nttec.com http://cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/as-report?as=AS32335 Hosted/routed Scott Richter AND Alan Ralsky - now decided to pick up Intercage/Atrivo. Perhaps someone does not read the news? http://news.google.com/news?q=intercage http://www.spamhaus.org/news.lasso?article=636 We hope that's the case and this is not a knowing routing decision. On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Matthew Moyle-Croft <mmc@internode.com.au> wrote:
On 16/09/2008, at 10:17 PM, *Hobbit* wrote:
So in cases like this where the community appears to agree that there's a consistently bad apple, what's preventing everyone from simply nullrouting the netblocks in question and imposing the death penalty?
Dunno - but something did occur to me this morning on the drive into work:
participants (5)
-
hobbit＠avian.org -
Matthew Moyle-Croft -
Paul Vixie -
Suresh Ramasubramanian -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu