[afnog] UCEPROTECT-Network Level 3, who takes the blame?

[Badru Ntege]

> The problem I see here, specifically, is that UCEPROTECT isn't blocking
> just the provider with the spamming customers, they're blocking the
> entire
> /16, which contains a lot of _entirely unrelated_ ISPs, in completely
> different countries, with no relationship whatsoever with anybody who's
> having a spam problem, and no special leverage to get them to fix it,
> even
> if they did know who it was.  This is like pulling a random hostage off
> the street, and telling them to stop crime.  It doesn't help the crime
> problem, and it causes a problem of its own.

[Badru Ntege] 

Me suspects there's a money making scheme here.  A network with a /24 could
survive 7 days of blacklisting but a upstream provider owning a /16  with
several paying customers will have no choice but to pay cash to be
immediately de-listed.

>From a commercial perspective it works but ethically it stinks.  If this is
a sign of things to come one needs to be very worried. 

Someone correct me if I'm wrong which I hope I am.