nanog mailing list archives
Re: Extreme spam testing
From: Andy Dills <andy () xecu net>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 17:25:56 -0500 (EST)
On 23 Dec 2003, Paul Vixie wrote:
You'd be hard pressed to frame what NJABL does in terms of "abuse", because of the intent, and because of the actual bit volume involved.intent does not, and cannot, matter. when an isp hears a complain about spam, and seeks explaination from their spamming customer, an answer of the form "we have only the best of intentions", then the result still has to be service disconnection.
Therefore, in accordance with your logic, if I have a "spam in hand", and I probe your servers to determine if you're an open relay, I'm myself spamming, and that is network abuse, and my ISP should disconnect me. So intent doesn't matter, huh? Andy --- Andy Dills Xecunet, Inc. www.xecu.net 301-682-9972 ---
Current thread:
- Extreme spam testing Chris Brenton (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Etaoin Shrdlu (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Chris Brenton (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Andy Dills (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Chris Brenton (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Niels Bakker (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Andy Dills (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Chris Brenton (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Paul Vixie (Dec 23)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Andy Dills (Dec 23)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Paul (Dec 23)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Andy Dills (Dec 23)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Paul (Dec 23)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Chris Brenton (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Etaoin Shrdlu (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Vadim Antonov (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Andy Dills (Dec 22)
- Re: Extreme spam testing Suresh Ramasubramanian (Dec 22)