Re: [Asrg] draft-irtf-asrg-bcp-blacklists-07 [re-send]

[Neil Schwartzman <[e-mail]>]

On Feb 28, 2011, at 5:49 PM, Richard Welty wrote:

> please list me as being in favor of this draft.

<aol> +1, and agreed. Heck, I may have even been the person to suggest this clause, some years ago at the IRTF meeting when the ASRG was resurrected. Charging for delisting is just plain bad business.

Allow me to take a brief moment to draw a significant line between the Spamhaus business model, and one based upon delisting. For those too drunk, blind, or somehow mentally deficient to spot it for themselves, it is simple. One charges the beneficiaries of a given DNSBL (Spamhaus) and thus motivates a blacklist operator to run the very best product possible. The other, such as previously done by SORBS, or now UCE Protect, motivates the DNSBL operator to list as many IPs as possible (1) for financial profit.

(Tangentially, were I an employee, particularly senior middle-management, like a Director, of a firm where presumably non-unionized staff went on 'strike' I would find that reason to rouse the CEO from his nightly reveries, not sit back and watch things play out. As it stands, the unanimity of the vote is noteworthy, and I doubt Messagelabs and Nortel are going to take this lying down. An abnegation of professional responsibility, in my mind.)

(1) UCE Protect claims to have listed a significant number of IPs in the past week:

Spammer listings within the last 7 days:
Level 1: 1767801 IP's, Level 2: 21354 Allocations, Level 3: 583 ASN's. Last Updated: 01.03.2011 13:01 CET
--
Neil Schwartzman
Executive Director
CAUCE
The Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email, North America Inc.

http://cauce.org
http://twitter.com/cauce
IM: caucecanada
Tel.: [phone]