Re: RBL Update (Re: Lets go vixie!! rbl)

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer () mhsc com>]

At 05:12 PM 6/18/98 -0400, Dean Anderson wrote:
> My apologies. I confused Karl Denninger with Karl Auerbach, who is an
> attorney.

I was wondering when Karl got a JD <grin>.

> In response to Karl Denninger:
>
> At 2:16 PM -0400 6/18/98, Karl Denninger wrote:
> > Dean, you keep changing your tune.
> >
> > First you said *any* spamblocking was illegal.
>
> Yes. Any spam blocking when you aren't a party to the email is illegal. Nor
> is it a departure from anything I have said, previously.
>
> So, does this mean you agree that *some* spamblocking is illegal?  (I
> suspect not, but surprise me.)

The only way you could do it is by blocking the packet stream based on
source or detination addrs. If I was on either end, and even if it was
caused by one of my users, we'd be talkin'. Either in, or out, of a
court-room, depending on whether your worth more than a burnt light-bulb,
or not. What you're proposing is STUPID and dangerous.

We run SSH encrypted VPN streams between our sites, and our customers. No
way you can filter on content.

> This reads like a political attack. (#25: claim your opponent has waffled,
> but offer no evidence that anything is different). But I'm not running for
> any office.  My credibility has no relevance to the truth of whether or not
> 2511 can apply to network providers. Its federal law. Network providers and
> employees ought to be roughly aware of the laws which apply to them.  And
> certainly not misled.

In which country?

> It is obvious now that it can apply. Its also just as clear that there are
> some legal limitations on what network providers can do with "their
> equipment".

Ain't no limitations. No CASH, no VOTE. It's that simple. Customers and
shareholders are the only ones with a vote around here. Anything else is at
our discretion.

> > How would THAT come about, pray tell?  Do you know how modern SMTP based
> > email actually *works*?
>
> Yes, but apparently you don't.  This isn't the only way its handled. Some
> people "transparently" intercept SMTP.  6 months ago I pointed out UUCP as
> well. And there is also route filtering via BGP RBL. If they aren't a party
> to the communication, then its illegal. (like I said before)

Your credibility is toast now. Karl not knowing how SMTP works? <hehehe> It
is, to laugh <HA!>

> I'm really disappointed that people keep claiming that 2511 can't possibly
> apply to a network provider, in spite of the now overwhelming proof to the
> contrary.  But then apparently 2/3s of the democrats think that Clinton
> didn't screw Monica. And some people think Nixon didn't break any laws.  I
> can't change that sort of blind belief.

When the local gov start subsidizing my bandwidth, then they might get a
small vote. Until then, they can PUAR.
_________________________________________________ 
Morgan Hill Software Company, Inc. 
Colorado Springs, CO - Livermore, CA - Morgan Hill,
CA                                    
Domain Administrator 
MHSC2-DOM and MHSC3-DOM
Administrative and Technical contact 
____________________________________________ 
InterNIC Id: MHSC hostmaster (HM239-ORG) 
e-mail: <mailto:hostmaster () mhsc com>mailto:hostmaster () mhsc com 
web -pages: <http://www.mhsc.com/>http://www.mhsc.com/