Spamhaus...

Fri Feb 19 18:59:19 UTC 2010

Marc Powell wrote:
> On Feb 18, 2010, at 2:25 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
>   
>> On 18/02/2010 10:40, Michelle Sullivan wrote:
>>     
>>> They seem to be doing that a lot of late.  They also contacted my
>>> employer and demanded $100k/yr(?) for having a "Use Spamhaus RBL" in our
>>> software.  
>>>       
>> I sympathise.  It's very frustrating when you try to deal with these
>> anti-spam outfits in a reasonable way and you're met with almost completely
>> arbitrary b/s.
>>     
>
> What's arbitrary about free for non-commerical use, everyone else pays? When you include it in a commercial product, yes, you should have to pay for it. If you're making money by reselling or providing access to the Spamhaus lists, you should have to pay for it. There's a lot of work that goes into it (I'm sure Michelle would agree) and they have very specific criteria under which they will allow free use and under which they will not. If you don't like it, make your own lists. If you *really* don't like it, make your own lists, and provide a free public infrastructure to support billions of requests a day.
>
>   

I can tell you that building infrastructure to support our current load
of 30 billion DNS queries per day is not as simple as some people
think.  That said the difference in infrastructure from 5billion pre day
to the 50 billion peak we had was just the number of boxes once the
infrastructure was designed and put in place.  I can build and deploy a
new member of the infrastructure including OS build in around 30 minutes
- of which 10 minutes are updating the config the remainder are jump
starting the OS.

The other points I agree with.  If you don't like it or don't agree,
don't use it and/or build your own.

Michelle