jschachter at psnw.com
Thu Nov 25 04:15:31 UTC 1999
On Wed, 24 Nov 1999, Dean Anderson wrote:
> We don't run relays out of laziness. We went out of our way to enable
> them. We go out of our way to monitor them for unauthorized use. We
> would certainly prefer an authenticated mail system. We have to live
> with what is currently deployed.
You obviously did go out of your way to enable them, seeing as how theres
much better ways out there than having an open relay. Monitoring your
servers for unauthorized use won't prevent spam. You don't have to live
with open relay, you choose to live with it because you're too incompetant
to do it the right way.
> What annoys me about the pressure from the junior antispammer league is
> they go from "gee, you know you can close those relays"
> We respond "Yes, we know. We operate them on purpose for business
> reasons". At times, I've explained these business reasons in detail. The
> technical conclusion is then that we have to operate relays.
> They then jump to "Thats unacceptable. You MUST CLOSE THEM".
A perfectly logican thing to say. The Internet is a communications medium,
a place of Internet exchange. It is not there to make you money. Just
because what you're doing is an accepted business practice (screw the
world to make a few bucks), doesn't make it ok, and something that
everyone should live with.
> We say "No. Absolutely not."
> They say "Well, in that case we're going to start committing crimes
> against your service, posting to alt.2600, inciting attacks, and wasting
> your time, bandwidth, and computer resources until you agree to close
So what you're saying is, its ok for you to screw with the Internet, but
its not ok for the Internet to screw with you? Its ok for you to waste the
Internet's time, bandwidth, and resources, but when someone does it to you
its a crime? MMMMMMMKAY
Jesse Schachter .,. Systems Administrator
The Protosource Network .,. Main Number: (888) 643-8558
<JSchachter at PSNW.COM> .,. Fax: (559) 490-8630
More information about the NANOG