Re: failure notice (about relays.osirusoft.com)
Take it somewhere else please, like news.admin.mail-abuse or whatever that
newsgroup is that has a bunch of posers claiming not to be from SPEWS and
other fascist BLs. Apparently that newsgroups is specifically used for this
kind of thing. No, seriously though, take it somewhere else. You are not
only generating noise on the isp list, you are doing it on the user list as
well which makes it twice as bad.
vec
----- Original Message -----
From: "John W. M. Stevens" <john@betelgeuse.us>
To: "Jason Lim" <maillist@jasonlim.com>
Cc: "John W. M. Stevens" <john@betelgeuse.us>;
<debian-isp@lists.debian.org>; <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 12:00 PM
Subject: 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?
>
> Yes.
>
> > > > you can visit
> > > > the militany NANAE newsgroup for resolution, but if you take a look
at
> > the
> > > > 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.
>
> > Are
> > 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
> to 'em.
>
> > There are plenty of good RBLs to use... see
>
> So far, after following you suggestion, my spam intake rate has jumped
> hugely.
>
> > 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
> so far.
>
> > 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:
> > >
> > > 202.85.170.67
> > >
> > > When I query 202.85.170.67 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 202.85.169.1 and many others around that
> > http://openrbl.org/ip/202/85/169/1.htm
> >
> > 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,
> for AT&T.
>
> > 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
> free will.
>
> > > 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
> valid.
>
> 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.
>
> John S.
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-request@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
Reply to: