Re: failure notice (about relays.osirusoft.com)
On Sun, Aug 18, 2002 at 05:27:00PM +1000, Jason Lim wrote:
> What I call a resolution method are those used by ORDB.org, SPAMCOP.net,
> VISI.com, and plenty of other ones.
Around all day . . .
> > Which means, quite simply, that iAdvantage hosts spammers, and refuses
> > to remove them.
> If you'd go the newgroup that Joe Jared tells you to go to in his listing,
> you'd see the so called "large amount" of complaints about iAdvantage.
> Have you actually looked?
> > > you can visit
> > > the militany NANAE newsgroup for resolution, but if you take a look at
> > > messages there.... ugh... swearing at each other, threats, etc. Take a
> > > look for yourself.
> > Been there. Seen it. There are two sides to this issue, and when
> > you put 'em both on the same news group, you'd better expect
> > flames, especially when they are so totally diametrically opposed.
> This only supports my previous statment that telling people to go to NANAE
> for so-called resolution is a farce.
Not a farce. Have you ever listened to a really heated debate in any
Western legislative body?
Heated, is a mild term. Such forums are always nasty, heated, and
difficult. You are making a cultural mistake.
> > blars, like selward, lists entire net blocks. As I said, I find this
> > far to fanatical for my personal taste.
> Shall I remind you that OSIRUSOFT is blocking entire net blocks?
Where did you get this information? As far as I know, that isn't
the case, but as always, I'll look at anything.
Oh, and shall I remind *YOU* that I agreed to switch to visi for a week?
And already, I'm getting three times the spam I was.
> A large chunk of traffic from HK, in fact.
And if I continue the way I am going (dropping MTA IP addresses into
my personal block list as the junk arrives), I'll have blocked about
22 percent of HK's biggest ISP's in a months time.
> > > and also Joe Jared's own personal list. It is Joe Jared's own
> > > personal list that is the problem . . .
> > A problem for . . . who? You, personally?
> Shouldn't that be a problem for you as well?
No. Why? Except for this short discussion with you, I have no
need or interest in any of the "Amazing Offers!" sent to me
from Asia, and no correspondents there. If I did, I would white list
the one, particular address used by that correspondent.
> You are using a list that is
> contrived by a single person, including his own biased opinions, etc.
Are there any other kind? Every organization is simply the combined
biased opinions of it's leaders/perception management personnel.
> you willing to let your orgainization's communications be controlled by a
> single person's biased opinions?
Osirusoft, even when I used their list, did not control my
communications. *I* do. I chose their list, I chose to try an
experiment where I replaced osirusoft with visi, and at the rate I'm
getting new spam now, I'll be choosing to switch back to osirusoft
after this week is out.
> As I said, I FULLY SUPPORT blocking of abused open relays (ala ORDB and
> many others), and individual IPs (ala Spamcop and many others), but not
> the full blocking of netblocks or countries (ala Blars, xslwerard,
> osirusoft, etc.).
Oh, I agree. Which is why if you can show me some proof that osirusoft
blocks entire netblocks because of the actions of a single *SEPARABLE*
entity (the separable entity is an important point), I'll probably have
to find a way to white list parts of osirusoft's list if/when I go back
> There are plenty of good RBLs to use... see
So far, after following you suggestion, my spam intake rate has jumped
> http://www.declude.com/JunkMail/Support/ip4r.htm for a big list. It's not
> as if osirusoft is your only option ...
No, they are not my only option. But they've been the best I've tried
> why you defend them so much eludes
> me, especially with so many better lists out there.
Because the others out there *AREN'T* better! For my needs (except for
you, I have no need to receive any email from Asia, and after you get
sick of trying to convert me, I'll be back to none), blocking most
of Asia has worked to reduce my spam, while not costing me any
communications I want or need.
Why you attack them so much, also eludes me. But beyond our shared
dislike of blocking entire netblocks, we aren't going to agree.
> > I just did. mail.iadvantage.net resolves to:
> > 220.127.116.11
> > When I query 18.104.22.168 against relays.osirusoft.com, a
> > 127.0.0.4 is returned.
> > And since this MTA is being used by spammers and spamvertisers,
> > it is quite reasonably black listed.
> Nope... not "THIS" mta... you mean the entire net blocks?
No. I meant that MTA. Examples of spam from this address have
been posted to NANE.
> try 22.214.171.124 and many others around that
> 202.85.153-178.* is being blocked, along with a lot more....
> 203.194.128-191 .* is another
Are all of these owned by iAdvantage?
or are they other HK ISP's?
> As you can see, a good amount of HK is being blocked by OSIRUSOFT... a lot
> of HK that has nothing to do with spam.
But none of the HK ISP's will even respond to spam complaints, and they
will not terminate the accounts/access of spammers.
Why don't you try to convince your carrier to institute and enforce
a reasonable acceptable use policy (AUP)? I'm doing the same thing, here,
> iAdvantage specialize in providing
> redudant bandwidth... so everyone that uses them is being blocked.
Seems to me that you've got three choices: accept that people outside
of Asia are difficult to email, start working with iAdvantage to
institute and enforce a reasonable AUP, or move to a different
provider (if possible).
I accept that anybody who uses selwerd, for instance, as a pure block
list isn't going to get my email. Nothing I can do about it, and
like you, I feel like an innocent falsely accused, but it's his
list, and the people who use his list are doing so of their own
> > Therefore, osirusoft DOES have a resolution policy. Get
> > iAdvantage to terminate the accounts of its spammers, make
> > sure its servers are secure, ask for retest for forms sake,
> > then request that they be removed.
> I'll repeat, THERE IS NO TEST.
You are wrong.
There is a test for open relays.
> There is NO way to get out unless you argue
> with the militants at NANAE ...
Which is, yes, another part of the process . . . you just blithely
skipped over the part about removing the spammers. Obviously, running
an open relay is something that can be mechanically tested for, while
removing spammer accounts is something you are going to have to
discuss with others, and especially the ones who run the BL's.
> I life is too short to waste time arguing
> with those people. It's a rather fruitless exercise.
Well, hey, don't bother then. I sent two emails to selwerd's operator,
then dropped the issue. His list, his choice.
> And since Joe Jared has iAdvantage on his own personal biased list... why
> do you think there is a chance in hell he'll take em off?
Because he's taken addresses off before, lots of times. I believe
that he would take iAdvantage off, if they cleaned up their act, and
demonstrated that fact to him.
Knowing HK ISP's as well as anybody can (they never respond!), I
don't believe that will ever happen, though.
> Find "all the
> compaints" he tries to talk about... and you'll soon find how few there
> are in comparison to the other big ISPs.
I did the google search. I read some of the complaints. They are
As to how many valid complaints it takes to justify black listing . . .
as you've already pointed out, that is a policy set by the list manager.
> Also... SHOW me all the spammers.
I could send you a list of the IP addresses I blocked personally on
my MTA before switching to a block list. Better than 70 percent of
those IP addresses where owned by Asian ISP's.
But why bother? The key point, the one we already agree on, is that
blocking entire net blocks is not good policy. If you choose to use
a list that does this, then do so with open eyes, after carefully
considering whether the blocked net blocks are ones that you want
to communicate with by email.
> SEARCH google groups for it. COMPARE
> that to Rackspace, Sprint, and other USA companies, and tell me the volume
> of complaints is anywhere near those US companies.
No, of course not! But you are using false statistics, so that
particular figure means nothing.