nanog mailing list archives
Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats
From: Julian DeMarchi <julian () jdcomputers com au>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 15:23:30 +1000
On 01/10/2013 02:55 PM, Rob McEwen wrote:
But if your information is accurate and I understand you correctly, then I agree that they shouldn't list the whole /24 in their PTR list if SOME of those IPs *do* have PTRs.
My information is correct. The /24 is listed _only_ on the no-ptr list. --- List Status RATS-Dyna - Not on the list RATS-NoPtr - On the list. Worst Offender Alert RATS-Spam - Not on the list --- --julian
Current thread:
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats, (continued)
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats Tony Finch (Jan 11)
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats JP Viljoen (Jan 10)
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats Owen DeLong (Jan 10)
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats Chris Boyd (Jan 09)
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats Julian DeMarchi (Jan 09)
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats Rich Kulawiec (Jan 10)
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats Rich Kulawiec (Jan 09)
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats Barry Shein (Jan 10)
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats Nicolai (Jan 09)
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats Rob McEwen (Jan 09)
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats Julian DeMarchi (Jan 09)
- Re: [SHAME] Spam Rats Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. (Jan 10)