nanog mailing list archives

Re: Yahoo and their mail filters..


From: Matthew Petach <mpetach () netflight com>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 20:56:22 -0800

On 2/25/09, Barry Shein <bzs () world std com> wrote:
 On February 26, 2009 at 09:14 ops.lists () gmail com (Suresh Ramasubramanian) wrote:
  > Well... If you think theres no value in the AOL or other feedback
  > loops and your network is clean enough without that, well then, dont
  > sign up to it and then bitch when all you get for your boutique
  > network with users who are by and large fellow geeks doesnt generate
  > any actual spam at all.

Hey, I didn't bitch, I didn't say it was valueless, I didn't say any
 of this. Can't you make your point without amplifying and putting
 words in my mouth? It sounds to me like you just want to vent.

 I suggested that probably 99% of the false positives I see could be
 avoided by just waiting until there are two or more complaints from
 the same source before firing it back as spam.

But aren't the spam messages sufficiently randomized these days to
make it impossible to get *two* complaints about the same spam, since
the messages are all uniquified with randomized strings in them?

Matt


Current thread: