Yahoo and their mail filters..

Matthew Petach mpetach at
Thu Feb 26 04:56:22 UTC 2009

On 2/25/09, Barry Shein <bzs at> wrote:
>  On February 26, 2009 at 09:14 ops.lists at (Suresh Ramasubramanian) wrote:
>   > Well... If you think theres no value in the AOL or other feedback
>   > loops and your network is clean enough without that, well then, dont
>   > sign up to it and then bitch when all you get for your boutique
>   > network with users who are by and large fellow geeks doesnt generate
>   > any actual spam at all.
> Hey, I didn't bitch, I didn't say it was valueless, I didn't say any
>  of this. Can't you make your point without amplifying and putting
>  words in my mouth? It sounds to me like you just want to vent.
>  I suggested that probably 99% of the false positives I see could be
>  avoided by just waiting until there are two or more complaints from
>  the same source before firing it back as spam.

But aren't the spam messages sufficiently randomized these days to
make it impossible to get *two* complaints about the same spam, since
the messages are all uniquified with randomized strings in them?


More information about the NANOG mailing list