incorrect spam setups cause spool messes on forwarders
John Brown (CV)
jmbrown at chagresventures.com
Tue Dec 2 10:37:00 UTC 2003
telling spammers 4xx or 5xx doesn't matter, they don't listen.
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 09:18:21PM +0100, Daniel Roesen wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 12:52:28PM -0700, Michael Lewinski wrote:
> > The idea is to "punish" spammers by filling up their queues, although
> > honestly I don't know of any spammers who actually *have* queues. They
> > just borrow other people's of course.
> Correct. More and more, anti-spammers are annoying me more than
> the spammers. Anti-spammers tend to "make my problem YOUR problem"
> thinking. Be it mangled sender addresses (this "NOSPAM" nonsense),
> be it 450 to suspected spam.
> Antispanners seem to be very easy in accepting collateral damage
> to the net.
More information about the NANOG