North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: open relays at Earthlink

  • From: Adam Todd
  • Date: Wed Aug 26 12:02:56 1998

>ISPs sell customers a TCP/IP connection to the Internet.  To me that means
>taking my IP datagrams and delivering them to where I address them.  I

UUNET sells connections to users that allows them to deliver packets?  Only
problem is so many places block more and more UUNET traffic every day.
Eventually UUNET will have to do something about it's inability to transit
anything except the backbones and it's a pretty lonely world out there on
your own.

UUNET is not the only offender.  Although I must compliment NETCOM.NET for
their speedy and responsive fix to a SPAMER last week.  I was actually
SURPRISED to get a response - personalised.  But it arrived and that's a
credit to NETCOM.

>On the other hand, I would fully support anyone's right to filter
>connections from my dialin user pool addresses if they felt that they
>needed to do that.  I would, in my personal opinion, be happy to provide
>such a person with my IP pool address ranges, or info on the domain names
>we use for that (which are easy to deduce, anyway?).

Please send me the list of Domain Names and IP addresses.  You might have
to do it via this list as we got fed up with sending requests to UUNET to
sort out the SPAMING problems and just deny UU.NET totally.

>(Of course, I'd rather persuade this person than my organization deals
>responsibly with spammers - but no doubt I'd be unable to persuade some)

Please try. I've got 20 odd forwards of SPAMS from the last two months that
have had ZERO response and over 2 months from the first message, they kept

I guess there is a limit to patience and "seven day grace periods."

>If enough people refused to take mail from my pool addresses then I guess
>my customers will be duly "encouraged" to use the provided relays. (Most

One hopes, but it's not the legitimate customers that are the problem and
in some countries the ISPs have to foot the bill for YOUR clients sending
JUNK to them anyway.  It wodu lbe far cheaper for everyone to not have
those little streches of SMTP spaning the world trying to make a delivery
only to be rejected and instead rejected them where it doesn't cost money.

>do anyway, of course)  If only a few refuse to take the mail then most
>deliveries still work fine directly; and those few feel happy that they
>are "protected".

I'm not happy.  I've now got a list of SPAM relay sites that grows far to
rapidly.  Eventually no one will be able to send email to our networks or
those of our associates. 

So much for "Inteenet"

>Doesn't this arrangement make sense?


Are you saying it's fine for your network users to send traffic over other
peoples links to be rejected?  When you know full well it will be rejected?

Adam Todd
Business Development, Technology, Domain Registration and Network Advisory
Phone +61 2 9729 0565	- Todd Corporation
Fax   +61 2 4659 6786	- AHNET
			- AURSC
Telstra Reseller and Telstra Convey Member (Not an Employee of Telstra)