Re: RBL-type BGP service for known rogue networks?
On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Brian Sheppard wrote:
I doubt any such database exists publically. It's a liability issue for one and if it was being compiled, officials at the big providers would probably already have taken corrective action.
These *exact* same arguments were used/continue to be used against RBL/RSS... -Dan
Dan Hollis wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Brian Sheppard wrote:
I doubt any such database exists publically. It's a liability issue for one and if it was being compiled, officials at the big providers would probably already have taken corrective action.
These *exact* same arguments were used/continue to be used against RBL/RSS...
...and the MAPS folks are still looking for the landmark lawsuit that will decide things once and for all. I don't think they've been sued yet. -- North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, BOFH - President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor Pictures of two of my 'children': http://www.WrinkleDogs.com About Spamfighters: "We're not net nazis. We're dot communists." - W. Arnold
On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Steve Sobol wrote: | > These *exact* same arguments were used/continue to be used against | > RBL/RSS... | | ...and the MAPS folks are still looking for the landmark lawsuit that | will decide things once and for all. I don't think they've been sued | yet. | This is ridiculous, a non-issue 1. Nobody on the Internet is required to accept traffic for anyone 2. None of these lists block ANYTHING. PROVIDERS BLOCK. If anyone is a target, it's the provider using these services, not the list. Also, see 1. --- Reverend Chris Cappuccio http://www.dqc.org/~chris/
Chris Cappuccio wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jul 2000, Steve Sobol wrote:
| > These *exact* same arguments were used/continue to be used against | > RBL/RSS... | | ...and the MAPS folks are still looking for the landmark lawsuit that | will decide things once and for all. I don't think they've been sued | yet. |
This is ridiculous, a non-issue
1. Nobody on the Internet is required to accept traffic for anyone 2. None of these lists block ANYTHING. PROVIDERS BLOCK. If anyone is a target, it's the provider using these services, not the list. Also, see 1.
*I* agree with you. I'd venture to guess that most of the people on this list also agree with you. However, unless there's something I don't know about you guys, there are no lawyers or judges amongst the readers of NANOG. The problem is, although judges are usually pretty good at making the right decision, there's no guarantee that if this issue went to trial, MAPS would win. And in the highly litigious environment in which we live, it's a good idea to make sure you have all the legal bases covered. -- North Shore Technologies, Cleveland, OH http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net Steve Sobol, BOFH - President, Chief Website Architect and Janitor Pictures of two of my 'children': http://www.WrinkleDogs.com About Spamfighters: "We're not net nazis. We're dot communists." - W. Arnold
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 20:09:26 EDT, Steve Sobol said:
The problem is, although judges are usually pretty good at making the right decision, there's no guarantee that if this issue went to trial, MAPS would win.
It was once explained to me, totally off the record, by <you know who you are>, that the biggest legal issue was that although MAPS just provides data, and the providers use that data to make decisions, there was a legal question of whether that constituted "conspiracy to engage in restraint of trade" against the sites listed. The problem is, of course, that the *combination* of MAPS and a provider *is* engaged in a conspiracy to restrain the spammers... ;) -- Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech
participants (4)
-
Chris Cappuccio -
Dan Hollis -
Steve Sobol -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu