In <m3iu0spigt.fsf@emma1.emma.line.org> Matthias Andree (ma@dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de) wrote:
> "Khimenko Victor" <khim@sch57.msk.ru> writes:
>> It's not possible since ABOVE.NET choose to block ORBS. If systems @ ABOVE.NET
>> are blacklisted it's ABOVE.NET fault, not ORBS fault.
> ORBS has NO MEANS, NO RIGHT and NO JUSTIFICATION to block domains just
> because they do not co-operate.
ORBS DOES NOT AFFECT domains that are "not co-operate". ORBS just adding
them in their database as such. And it should be done since idea to block
ORBS and get out of blacklist that way come to mind to decent amount of
"sysadmins" :-/
> Period. They may block relaying hosts within @above.net, but the approach is
> wrong. In dubio pro reo.
It's working approach :-)
>> Not dozen peoples. Just city's head. And they DO NOT SHOOT them. They just
>> refuse to speak with them till policy is not changed. It's what US goverment
>> is doing all the time: "we will not speak with you till you'll do this and
>> that". If it's Ok for US goverment why it's not Ok for ORBS ?
> Because they are telling OTHERS not to speak to the defendants.
They do not speak for others. They just keep database. OTHERS can use it or
ignore it.
>> > Is generic blacklisting right?
>>
>> If there are no choice then yes.
> This will lead to the point where spammers and careless administrators
> rule who can send mail and who cannot. This is wrong.
I can not see how spammers will rule who can send mail and who cannot.
Administrators are doing this already - it's their job, after all. ORBS or
no ORBS.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 23 2000 - 21:00:17 EST