nanog mailing list archives
Re: sorbs.net
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 21:40:35 +0530
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 07:27:21 -0800, Wes Hardaker <wjhns61 () hardakers net> wrote:
I wish it were always so easy. I've been talking to an administrator lately who's policy is that "loosing occasional email is ok if it means we keep out a whole bunch of spam". If they're that far over
That is a far cry from far dumber filtering mistakes that keep happening, and that I have an issue with. If an admin has spam in hand - go ahead. Block till its fixed, if the numbers add up the way this guy says. And be prepared to listen, and to unblock If you are blocking based on your misreading of forged spam, or are implementing over-extreme filters, and dont want to listen to complaints about it, or to address false positives, consider downgrading the infrastructure you manage from "production mailserver" to "etch a sketch" More on spam-l or some other more appropriate list. I'm starting to repeat myself -srs -- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists () gmail com)
Current thread:
- Re: sorbs.net, (continued)
- Re: sorbs.net Rich Kulawiec (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Jason Slagle (Mar 21)
- Message not available
- Re: sorbs.net Jay R. Ashworth (Mar 21)
- Re: sorbs.net Suresh Ramasubramanian (Mar 21)
- Re: sorbs.net Michael . Dillon (Mar 22)
- Re: sorbs.net Jay R. Ashworth (Mar 22)
- Re: sorbs.net Michael . Dillon (Mar 22)
- Re: sorbs.net Jay R. Ashworth (Mar 22)
- Re: sorbs.net Wes Hardaker (Mar 22)
- Re: sorbs.net Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 22)
- Re: sorbs.net Suresh Ramasubramanian (Mar 22)
- Re: sorbs.net Christopher L. Morrow (Mar 21)
- RE: sorbs.net Edward B. Dreger (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Niels Bakker (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Edward B. Dreger (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 15)
- Re: sorbs.net Jerry Pasker (Mar 15)