|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - -- Rich Kulawiec <[email protected]> wrote: 1. There's nothing "indiscriminate" about it. >I often block /24's and larger because I'm holding the *network* operators >responsible for what comes out of their operation. If they can't hold >the outbound abuse down to a minimum, then I guess I'll have to make >up for their negligence on my end. I don't care why it happens -- they >should have thought through all this BEFORE plugging themselves in >and planned accordingly. ("Never build something you can't control.") I would have to respectfully disagree with you. When network operators do due diligence and SWIP their sub-allocations, they (the sub-allocations) should be authoritative in regards to things like RBLs. $.02, - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.0 (Build 214) wj8DBQFGGBIlq1pz9mNUZTMRAkLuAJ4sjBnZ1IF4FBjFvMn4NlgK7lZysgCg3gT2 8e9PswhChgNhDHnCsY+Yf9M= =oJaW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/
|