nanog mailing list archives
Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful
From: Phil Howard <phil () charon milepost com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 08:13:54 -0600 (CST)
Art Houle writes...
So what do we do about this enterprising businessperson?
Same as any other. Make his efforts useless. Block the impact of it on your own network. I still believe in blocking spam where it has the impacts. Make mail relays un-hijackable. Make mail servers block the spam for your customers (unless the customers wants it through in which case they can configure or ask for that). -- Phil Howard +-------------------------------------------------------------+ KA9WGN | House committee changes freedom bill to privacy invasion !! | phil at | more info: http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,14180,00.html | milepost.com +-------------------------------------------------------------+
Current thread:
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful, (continued)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Mike Norris (Oct 31)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Phillip Vandry (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Joe Provo - Network Architect (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Turnando Fuad (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Justin W. Newton (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Alan Hannan (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Turnando Fuad (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Brian W. Pendleton (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Steve Sobol (Oct 30)
- Message not available
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Jay R. Ashworth (Oct 30)
- Re: Spam Control Considered Harmful Phil Howard (Oct 31)