jdfalk at cybernothing.org
Wed May 23 23:19:12 UTC 2001
On 05/23/01, Roeland Meyer <rmeyer at mhsc.com> wrote:
> I'm getting seriously confused here. I thought that the open-relay issue was
> irelevent to MAPS. That MAPS only black-holed confirmed SPAM sites (a little
> tougher, but more granular, charter). Further, that it was ORBS that listed
> open-relay sites specifically, whether they were involved in a spam or not
> (unacceptable due to punishing potential anti-spammers for proliferating
> spam that never saw their systems). To me, these are two entirely different
> charters. If MAPS starts to look like ORBS then I will stop using MAPS.
> Can someone please clarify?
MAPS is a company. They have three basic lists. One of them,
the RSS, contains open relays which have been abused by spammers.
http://mail-abuse.org/rss/ has more information.
Sometimes people use "MAPS" to refer to the MAPS RBL, which is
described at http://mail-abuse.org/rbl/ .
The most commonly overlooked (but individually most effective)
MAPS list is the DUL, at http://mail-abuse.org/dul/ .
Each has its own criteria and set of rules, and each has (as
might be expected) attracted assorted kooks and naysayers.
J.D. Falk SILENCE IS FOO!
<jdfalk at cybernothing.org>
More information about the NANOG