|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: We've been hit by the spammers, please have mercy
[Quoted message reformatted to wrap at 80 columns] On May 7, "James D. Wilson" <[email protected]> wrote: > During the NSF days there were acceptable use policies that governed > activities that were considered inappropriate to NSF and which could result > in denial of access across their wires. > > Since that seemed to hold up over the years, would it be possible (or legal) > for the NAPs etc. to have similar policies about SPAM which could result in > traffic from non-compliant sites not being routed? Personally, I'd rather not see the NAP operators take this much of an active stance on anything. They're the closest thing the Internet is ever gonna have to a "common carrier" that actually /does/ carry anybody's traffic. Next, they'd find themselves called in to resolve peering disputes, and it'd be a big mess. But if more sites -- especially larger ones -- were to drop peering with companies that blatantly ignore reports of abuse and attacks from within their networks, that would have a very similar impact. This has happened in the past from time to time, when incorrect routes were being mistaknely propogated, or to help stop syn-flooding and similar denial of service attacks. I've been wondering for quite a while why AGIS is unwilling to realize that mail server hijacking /is/ a denial of service attack to most providers, and deal with it accordingly. ---------========== J.D. Falk <[email protected]> =========--------- | "A straight line may be the shortest distance between two points... | | but it is by no means the most interesting." | | -- Jon Pertwee as Doctor Who in "Doctor Who and | | the Time Warrior" by Robert Holmes (BBC, 1974) | ----========== http://www.cybernothing.org/jdfalk/home.html ==========---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|