Yahoo Mail Update

Ross ross at
Sun Apr 13 05:58:59 UTC 2008

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 8:54 PM, Rich Kulawiec <rsk at> wrote:
>  On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 05:51:23PM -0700, chuck goolsbee wrote:
>  > Thanks for the update Jared. I can understand your request to not be used
>  > as a proxy, but it exposes the reason why Yahoo is thought to be clueless:
>  > They are completely opaque.
>  >
>  > They can not exist in this community without having some visibity and
>  > interaction on an operational level.
>  I heartily second this.  Yahoo (and Hotmail) (and Comcast and Verizon)
>  mail system personnel should be actively participating here, on mailop,
>  on spam-l, etc.  A lot of problems could be solved (and some avoided)
>  with some interaction.
>  ---Rsk

Why should large companies participate here about mail issues? Last I
checked this wasn't the mailing list for these issues:

"NANOG is an educational and operational forum for the coordination
and dissemination of technical information related to
backbone/enterprise networking technologies and operational

But lets just say for a second this is the place to discuss company
xys's mail issue. What benefit do they have participating here? Likely
they'll be hounded by people who have some disdain for their company
and no matter what they do they will still be evil or wrong in some

It is easy for someone who has 10,000 users to tell someone who has 50
million users what to do when they don't have to work with such a
large scale enterprise.

I find it funny when smaller companies always tell larger companies
what they need to be doing.

ross [at]

More information about the NANOG mailing list