nanog mailing list archives
RE: SPEWS?
From: Alex Rubenstein <alex () nac net>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 23:14:28 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Quite. Since my last posting, I've told SpamAssassin (which, btw, is a rocking piece of ware) to count osirussoft (sp?) as a 0 point rule. They are so unilateral in the way they do this, and, often times don't even provide a _chance_ for the ISP to rectify the situation. It's crazy. On Wed, 19 Jun 2002, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
So, to the point; what is the consensus on SPEWs? I've never really noticed them until this point.It's sort of an interesting concept but at least in my opinion it is unusable as a blacklist. Did you find the listing was causing a lot of mail to bounce? Mark Radabaugh Amplex (419) 833-3635
-- Alex Rubenstein, AR97, K2AHR, alex () nac net, latency, Al Reuben -- -- Net Access Corporation, 800-NET-ME-36, http://www.nac.net --
Current thread:
- SPEWS? Alex Rubenstein (Jun 19)
- RE: SPEWS? Mark Radabaugh (Jun 19)
- RE: SPEWS? Alex Rubenstein (Jun 19)
- Re: SPEWS? Lionel (Jun 19)
- Re: SPEWS? Marc MERLIN (Jun 19)
- Re: SPEWS? Jason Slagle (Jun 19)
- RE: SPEWS? Alex Rubenstein (Jun 19)
- RE: SPEWS? Mark Radabaugh (Jun 19)
- Re: SPEWS? jlewis (Jun 19)
- Re: SPEWS? william (Jun 19)
- Re[2]: SPEWS? Richard Welty (Jun 19)
- Re: SPEWS? Steven J. Sobol (Jun 20)
- Re: SPEWS? william (Jun 20)
- Re: SPEWS? up (Jun 20)
- Re: SPEWS? Nathan J. Mehl (Jun 20)