I would have though people would have learned by now that
there is no technical solution to spam. You can go ahead
with all these wonderfully expensive
authentication/filtration/insertantispambuzzword systems until
the cows come home and you will +_still_+ recieve spam.Regards,
Neil.
And so we should do nothing?
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 18:50:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: bdragon@...
And so we should do nothing?
If a _few_ networks null-route abusers, said networks isolate
themselves. If _all_ networks cut off abusers, who becomes the
island?
Fixing the Internet is difficult. What can't be tackled
overnight isn't worth the effort. Let's leave it to future
generations. (At least we all feel a bit better each time after
we gripe on nanog.)
Eddy
bdragon@gweep.net writes:
And so we should do nothing?
of course not. but the first thing to do is "ignore naysayers". anybody
who tells you something can't be done should be suspected of extreme and
pervasive laziness until either they or you prove otherwise.
of course not. but the first thing to do is "ignore naysayers". anybody
who tells you something can't be done should be suspected of extreme and
pervasive laziness until either they or you prove otherwise.
thanks for the great technical analysys
Here is a company who thinks they have a solution for spam
http://www.nwtechusa.com/ironmail-zd-srit-enterprise-security.html
-Henry
bdragon@gweep.net wrote:
And so we should do nothing?
No, but neither should we plan on engineering a solution. As Neil say - and
many know Neil and I generally disagree on principal about everything - a
technical solution will never get rid of spam. It may reduce it for a time,
but not for very long. The "correct" solution is to make spam uneconomic by
some means, then it will slow down to a trickle, maybe.
Peter
And so we should do nothing?
No, but neither should we plan on engineering a solution.
not necessarily. as i have been trying to point out for some years,
look at bellovin's presentation at a nanog a few years ago on "pushback"
(sorry, i am on dialup and searches are a major pain). that isps have
not been beating up the vendors to work on this boggles the mind.
randy
not necessarily. as i have been trying to point out for some years,
look at bellovin's presentation at a nanog a few years ago on "pushback"
(sorry, i am on dialup and searches are a major pain). that isps have
not been beating up the vendors to work on this boggles the mind.
taking an 802.11 break in starbucks. here is the ref
http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0102/bellovin.html
randy