[afnog] UCEPROTECT blacklist

[Mike Barnard]

On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 6:44 PM, SM <sm at resistor.net> wrote:

> DNSBLs will be around as long as people use them (
> http://www.afnog.org/archives/2010-May/006008.html ).  There has been
> several postings to this mailing list about this topic over the years.  This
> community hasn't shown much interest in getting together and find out how to
> address the problem.
>
>
Yes, we have debated this numerous times on this list. I, personally, would
not say that there has not been much interest in getting together to find
out how to address the problem. The advice given by you is addressing the
problem.

If you meant finding a permanent solution to the likes of UCEPROTECT, then I
would say that we need to find a permanent solution to suicide bombers.
Rogue DNSBL's will surface here and there and will justify their policies.
Remember, its any ones prerogative to start any service they desire and run
it as they desire. The RFC you quoted says it all, the responsibility lies
squarely on the system administrators and the choices they make.



-- 
Mike

Of course, you might discount this possibility, but remember that one in
a million chances happen 99% of the time.
------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://afnog.org/pipermail/afnog/attachments/20100810/74247953/attachment.html>