Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 11:51:10 -0700 From: Vicky Rode <vickyr@socal.rr.com> To: nanog@merit.edu, nanog@nanog.org, nanog-support@nanog.org Cc: rrsecurity@socal.rr.com, vickyr@socal.rr.com Subject: Spamcop
Hi there,
Just wondering why was my e-mail thread (Hierarchical Credit-based Queuing (HCQ): QoS) dated 5/9/2004 9:36 PM reported as a spam? Just trying to understand so that I don't repeat it. Below is a cut and paste of the reported incident.
Vicky: I'm guessing here, but it was probably because the *.rr.com addresses originate a LOT of spam and someone has a procmail filter that automatically refers any mail from that domain to spamcop... Or it could be that someone didn't like what you wrote and reported it ... Dunno. Remember, I said that I'm **guessing**. Regards, Gregory Hicks
Please advice.
regards, /vicky
---- cut here ------
Return-Path: <988145978@bounces.spamcop.net> Received: from vamx01.mgw.rr.com ([24.28.193.148]) by acme-reston.va.rr.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-59787U250000L250000S0V35) with SMTP id com for <abuse@rr.com>; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:42:14 -0400 Received: from vmx2.spamcop.net (vmx2.spamcop.net [206.14.107.117]) by vamx01.mgw.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i4AEkwhn017175 for <abuse@rr.com>; Mon, 10 May 2004 10:47:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sc-app3.verio.ironport.com (HELO spamcop.net) (192.168.11.203) by vmx2.spamcop.net with SMTP; 10 May 2004 07:47:00 -0700 Received: from [68.13.211.63] by spamcop.net with HTTP; Mon, 10 May 2004 14:47:01 GMT From: 988145978@reports.spamcop.net To: abuse@rr.com Subject: [SpamCop (24.30.181.126) id:988145978]Hierarchical Credit-based Queuing (HCQ): QoS Precedence: list Message-ID: <rid_988145978@msgid.spamcop.net> Date: Sun, 9 May 2004 21:36:30 -0700 (PDT) X-SpamCop-sourceip: 24.30.181.126 X-Mailer: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.0.3705) via http://www.spamcop.net/ v1.3.4 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine
[ SpamCop V1.3.4 ] This message is brief for your comfort. Please use links below for details.
Email from 24.30.181.126 / Sun, 9 May 2004 21:36:30 -0700 (PDT) http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?i=z988145978zab5cec781dcfa15ae459c11bd03b7bef z
[ Offending message ] Return-path: <owner-x> Envelope-to: x Delivery-date: Mon, 10 May 2004 00:39:15 -0400 Received: from [198.108.1.26] (helo=trapdoor.merit.edu) by wilma.widomaker.com with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1BN2ZP-000Jo6-00 for x; Mon, 10 May 2004 00:39:15 -0400 Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) id B68EC91206; Mon, 10 May 2004 00:36:37 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: x Received: by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix, from userid 56) id 8645591243; Mon, 10 May 2004 00:36:37 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: x Received: from segue.merit.edu (segue.merit.edu [198.108.1.41]) by trapdoor.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50AFD91206 for <x>; Mon, 10 May 2004 00:36:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) id 3B3955914F; Mon, 10 May 2004 00:36:34 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: x Received: from ms-smtp-02-eri0.socal.rr.com (ms-smtp-02-qfe0.socal.rr.com [66.75.162.134]) by segue.merit.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAB7358E5D for <x>; Mon, 10 May 2004 00:36:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.2.2] (cpe-24-30-181-126.socal.rr.com [24.30.181.126]) by ms-smtp-02-eri0.socal.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with ESMTP id i4A4aUce025659 for <x>; Sun, 9 May 2004 21:36:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <409F________0602@socal.rr.com> Date: Sun, 09 May 2004 21:36:41 -0700 From: Vicky Rode <vickyr@socal.rr.com> Reply-To: vickyr@socal.rr.com User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (Windows/20040502) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: x Subject: Hierarchical Credit-based Queuing (HCQ): QoS X-Enigmail-Version: 0.83.6.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine Sender: owner-x Precedence: bulk Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu X-Loop: nanog
Hi there,
Just wondering if anyone out there has either implemented or looked into
this queuing method for quality of service implementation. This solution is offered (hardware solution) and patented by foursticks.com. According to foursticks, "HCQ achieves the efficiency and flexibility of first generation queuing systems, without the disadvantages."
It compares HCQ (interesting reading) w/ Class-Based Queuing (CBQ), Random Early Discard (RED) and Weighted Random Early Discard (WRED),Weighted Fair Queuing (WFQ),Priority Queuing (PQ) & Low Latency Queuing (LLQ).
Also can anyone recommend a qos forum which I can ping as well.
Any insight will be appreciated.
regards, /vicky
------------------------------------------------------------------- Gregory Hicks | Principal Systems Engineer Cadence Design Systems | Direct: 408.576.3609 555 River Oaks Pkwy M/S 6B1 | Fax: 408.894.3400 San Jose, CA 95134 | Internet: ghicks@cadence.com I am perfectly capable of learning from my mistakes. I will surely learn a great deal today. "A democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding on what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the results of the decision." - Benjamin Franklin "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." --Alexander Hamilton
On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 12:00:14PM -0700, Gregory Hicks wrote:
Just wondering why was my e-mail thread (Hierarchical Credit-based Queuing (HCQ): QoS) dated 5/9/2004 9:36 PM reported as a spam? Just trying to understand so that I don't repeat it. Below is a cut and paste of the reported incident.
Vicky:
I'm guessing here, but it was probably because the *.rr.com addresses originate a LOT of spam and someone has a procmail filter that automatically refers any mail from that domain to spamcop...
Or it could be that someone didn't like what you wrote and reported it ...
I've found that a number of people that are spamcop subscribers report messages as spam that are not when they don't know how to get removed from lists. I find this annoying and always make a note in the spamcop ticket saying they're fools when this happens. I do wish that rr.com would get a different dns naming system set up (ala comcast, using client.comcast.net or similar subdomain that does not have MX records to help with the direct-to-server SMTP problem I have with rr.com with spam..) - Jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.
At 12:09 PM 5/11/2004, Jared Mauch wrote:
I've found that a number of people that are spamcop subscribers report messages as spam that are not when they don't know how to get removed from lists.
It could also simply be a mistake. The inet-access list was once reported as a spam source by a happy subscriber who was busy reporting hundreds (or thousands?) of spams and clicked /included a list post by accident. jc -- p.s. Please do not cc me on replies to the list. Please reply to the list only, or to me only (as you prefer) but not to both.
JC Dill wrote:
It could also simply be a mistake. The inet-access list was once reported as a spam source by a happy subscriber who was busy reporting hundreds (or thousands?) of spams and clicked /included a list post by accident.
--
p.s. Please do not cc me on replies to the list. Please reply to the list only, or to me only (as you prefer) but not to both.
I'm going to join the guessing game and guess that some scoring system scored on uncommon words (hierarchical), trigger words (credit), and the number of Cc: entries (I did not count the ones in the original, the complaint had a bitch-list 4 or five long, some of the responses to it have 8 or 10 Cc:'s I think--I did not count them either), the origin (Road Runner) and so on and reached the conclusion of 'spam'. Welcome to the world where email has been taken away from us. -- Requiescas in pace o email Ex turpi causa non oritur actio http://members.cox.net/larrysheldon/
On Tue, 11 May 2004 12:00:14 -0700 (PDT) Gregory Hicks <ghicks@cadence.com> wrote:
I'm guessing here, but it was probably because the *.rr.com addresses originate a LOT of spam and someone has a procmail filter that automatically refers any mail from that domain to spamcop...
Or it could be that someone didn't like what you wrote and reported it ..
Dunno.
Remember, I said that I'm **guessing**.
here's another guess: someone wants off of nanog, lost or didn't understand the unsubscribe instructions and is submitting nanog email to spamcop to try and get off. it's a guess, but it has happened before with other lists. richard -- Richard Welty rwelty@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking 518-573-7592 Java, PHP, PostgreSQL, Unix, Linux, IP Network Engineering, Security
participants (5)
-
Gregory Hicks -
Jared Mauch -
JC Dill -
Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr. -
Richard Welty