RBL Update (Re: Lets go vixie!! rbl)

Tue Jun 16 06:21:07 UTC 1998

Dean Anderson writes:
> Seriously Paul, I would like to have some kind of announcement made on
> Nanog before you do that again, so that people can tell you not to do it.
> Breaking a large service provider is definitely an operational issue.  How
> much do you suppose such a service interuption cost the companies who
> couldn't communictate?

No one forces you to use the RBL. Personally, I feel Paul did the
right thing. If you don't feel he did the right thing, feel free to
not use the RBL.

> Of course, many know the opposing view, that RBL causes third party
> relaying,

And with time, that is becoming less and less prevalent. Eventually,
it will largely disappear.

> Now that we are completely "addicted" to usenet cancels, how long before
> the cancelers start to extort "support" money from ISPs?

Forever.

> What Vix is doing probably isn't illegal by itself, though it might
> possibly violate trademark or the new copyright law when domain names are
> used.

Huh? Quit playing lawyer. You don't do it well. Paul could be sued on
lots of bases, but it would be rather difficult to claim he was
violating trademark or copyright even on the most strained of
premises. Among other things, Mr. Anderson, HE DOESN'T BLOCK BASED ON
NAMES. The RBL doesn't contain a single domain name. Even if it did,
such a claim would be almost impossible to press, but given that he
doesn't, it would be completely impossible to press.

Perry