North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: SPAM Level Status - And why not stop the peering with lame ISPs

  • From: Suresh Ramasubramanian
  • Date: Thu Feb 09 21:04:48 2006
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=VqfV6uTTCCoM755gn0OTlKOzbJV5fdxpmRugAKjsr78dZnBxx9V3CvQH8XKDRGe0iQYzisFBbD6/+FnKoUFbZGsiVa61BSfAFqShaMfwO0q1G7YTuCe2vHwy3y8t85Nuq1URjyqSyoLfwh/XTYidn8B151CELvSNm5eiO3LVuC8=
On 2/10/06, Alain Hebert <[email protected]> wrote:
>     That new bunch of spam is hard to tag on digest alone...  And I dont
> believe in regexing the content to see if a url is listed (too many
> false positive).
>

Then you're doing it wrong.

And you'd discover for yourself that its a dumb move to nullroute or
depeer with everything you can think of, trying to block spam

Shouldnt be too hard to find that out even if you run a small local
ISP in montreal, given the huge number of chinese / vietnamese people
I saw there (they'd probably all use shaw and bell anyway)

If you didnt attend the MAAWG mtg in montreal late last year you
missed out on learning quite a lot of really operational spam
filtering, none of which included "nullroute whatever you can"

--
Suresh Ramasubramanian ([email protected])