Article on spammers and their infrastructure
morrowc.lists at gmail.com
Wed Dec 23 01:14:38 CST 2009
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 2:05 AM, Paul Ferguson <fergdawgster at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 10:58 PM, Christopher Morrow
> <morrowc.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Paul Ferguson <fergdawgster at gmail.com>
>>> Folks should not be so obtuse about these activities. It's almost
>>> blatantly in-your-face, so to speak. These guys have no fear of
>> no real arguement, but... 'please provide some set of workable solutions'
> First question: Solution(s) for which problem(s)?
ideally the 'bad folks get ip space' (which was part of the initial
thrust of the thread)
> Many of us have already tried to engage ICANN on domain registration issues
> (primarily bad registrars and policy cruft), as well as RIRs, etc., to no
some headway was made, some more may still come. It's certainly not
'fast' though :(
> I've simply given up on trying to make a dent in policy issues because
> profit trumps everything else, plus -- as I said -- I just have no spare
If the, for the ip space issue, main problem can't be solved without
policy this seems like abdication, no?
> I have taken a different set of tactics to go after criminal activities...
> policy stuff doesn't work.
also good... except that the only real fix for some of this is policy
things, I fear.
IP-address issues can't get solved without policy changes, which
happen today via community consensus. Domain-name issues have to get
hammered out from the top down (with some policy that allows
registries to impose change on registrars. This DNS issues may also
get resolved with action coming from ICANN (hope springs eternal).
More information about the NANOG