nanog mailing list archives
Re: SORBS Contact
From: Matthew Sullivan <matthew () sorbs net>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 10:47:40 +1000
Mark Andrews wrote:
I wasn't thinking about SORBS. It was a general warning to only put blocks on lists where the usage matches the policy of the list.
Ah my apologies I misinterpreted.
You'll get nothing but agreement from me on that statement. There currently is a need for the list, however there *shouldn't* be any need for it.I was thinking about a Australian cable provider that doesn't do the right thing. I'm sure there will be other ISP's that also fail to check the list policy before nominating the address blocks for the lists. In reality there shouldn't be the need for dialup lists.
Regards, Mat
Current thread:
- Re: rDNS naming conventions (was: Re: SORBS Contact), (continued)
- Re: rDNS naming conventions (was: Re: SORBS Contact) Suresh Ramasubramanian (Aug 10)
- Re: rDNS naming conventions (was: Re: SORBS Contact) Steven Champeon (Aug 10)
- Re: rDNS naming conventions (was: Re: SORBS Contact) Nicholas Suan (Aug 10)
- Re: rDNS naming conventions (was: Re: SORBS Contact) bmanning (Aug 10)
- Re: rDNS naming conventions (was: Re: SORBS Contact) Edward Lewis (Aug 10)
- Re: SORBS Contact Peter Corlett (Aug 10)
- Re: SORBS Contact Andrew D Kirch (Aug 11)
- Re: SORBS Contact Mark Andrews (Aug 09)
- Re: SORBS Contact Matthew Sullivan (Aug 09)
- Re: SORBS Contact Mark Andrews (Aug 09)
- Re: SORBS Contact Matthew Sullivan (Aug 09)
- Re: SORBS Contact Noel (Aug 10)
- Re: SORBS Contact Joe Maimon (Aug 10)
- RE: SORBS Contact David Schwartz (Aug 13)
- Re: SORBS Contact Richard A Steenbergen (Aug 13)
- Re: SORBS Contact D'Arcy J.M. Cain (Aug 14)
- RE: SORBS Contact David Schwartz (Aug 14)
- Re: SORBS Contact Jeremy Chadwick (Aug 14)
- RE: SORBS Contact Noel (Aug 14)