October 1997 - lir-wg - mailman.ripe.net

New Document available: RIPE-167
by RIPE NCC Document Annoucement Service 02 Oct '97

02 Oct '97

New/Revised RIPE Document Announcement -------------------------------------- A revised/new document is available from the RIPE document store. Ref: ripe-167 Title: A Regional Internet Registry for the CIS Author: R. Blokzijl, D.Karrenberg, A. Platonov Date: 02 October 1997 Format: PS=47638 TXT=2153 Obsoletes: Obsoleted by: Updates: Updated by: See also: Short content description ------------------------- This memorandum is intended to focus discussion about the establishment of a Regional Internet Registry serving the CIS and surrounding areas. Public comments are invited. The ultimate aim of this process is to achieve rough consensus about the issue within the region concerned. This memo represents the views of the individual authors only. It has not been endorsed by any organisation. Accessing the RIPE document store --------------------------------- The RIPE document store is available via anonymous FTP to ftp.ripe.net, in the directory ripe/docs. The URLs for the new documents on the FTP-server are: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-167.ps PostScript version ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-167.txt plain text version You can also access the RIPE documents in HTML format via WWW. RIPE-167 is not available from the WWW at this moment, but will be soon, at the following URL: http://www.ripe.net/docs/ripe-167.html Documents can also be retrieved from the RIPE document store using a mail server program. For more information on how to use the program, send email to <mail-server(a)ripe.net> with "send HELP" in the body text.

1 0

RE: spamming
by Pierre Reynes 02 Oct '97

02 Oct '97

Right. Could you guys discuss spamming in, lets say, something like 'lir-spam(a)ripe.net' I am tired of pressing the delete key all the time... Thanks, ======================> D N S T E L E C O M <====================== Pierre REYNES Immeuble La Fayette 2, place des vosges 92051 Paris la Defense 5 Tel: +33 (0)1 43 34 10 17 Fax: +33 (0)1 49 05 46 89 Email: preynes(a)dnstelecom.fr ==================================================================== -----Original Message----- From: Maarten E. Linthorst [SMTP:mel@csi.ch] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 1997 6:14 PM To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net Subject: spamming can we please discuss spamming on different mail list. regards GoldNet maarten linthorst

1 0

spamming
by Maarten E. Linthorst 02 Oct '97

02 Oct '97

can we please discuss spamming on different mail list. regards GoldNet maarten linthorst

1 0

More on spamming..
by Geert Jan de Groot 02 Oct '97

02 Oct '97

People may be interested to read http://maps.vix.com. It is my understanding that this list is also available as a BGP4-feed, so that you can build a blacklist that automatically adjusts to the spammer's moves. This adds more thrust to the effort and keeps support staff costs low (much lower than maintaining a list manually at least). It would be *great* if may ISP's would use this list to make one focused effort which would be more effective than everyone-for-his-own. Geert Jan PS: what's with the European IP numbers on the MAPS RBL?

11 14

Re: More on spamming..
by Miroslaw Jaworski 02 Oct '97

02 Oct '97

On Wed, 1 Oct 1997, Stephan Hermann wrote: > from the ISPs. > I can filter out the relay hosts, ok...but our customers gets e.g. mail > from customers of sprint, and I block the incoming connection from > customer-mail-relay.sprint.net (e.g.!!!). Well...then I can go and close my > business ;) > > No, if we want to stop those spammers, the logical idea is, that all ISPs > which are housing such spammers must ban them from their servers. They must > disconnect every PoP, which is housing such spam customers. yea... close all PoP's and "I can go and close my business ;)" I don't know how it is in other countries but here most of the customers are POP users. Direct lines ? Geee.. Only bigger companies can afford it. So when u get a spam, its from dial-line. most often.try to find who was it ? > Well, in Germany we have several problems with aol germany and t-online (a > service by Deutsche Telekom). What can we do ? Block the connections to > aol.com ? block the connections to t-online ? there is an ISP called Polbox here in Poland. they've got about 50 000 accounts ( people says that ). all these accounts are for free. people can get their www for free too... U can imagine what kind of people are on this server ( free.polbox.pl ). > if I do that, I'm going to get so much angry mails from my customers, that > I wish: "Give me Spams..but no more mails from my customers". I don't know > the situation in other countries, but blocking is not the answer of our > problem. exactly. appropiate filters should be huge... > We must find an answer, in a quite "commercial sense". Those people, IMHO, > stop spamming, if they get an invoice for IP traffic or a letter from our > lawyer. or there is another solution: if all administrators will be consequent ( is it right word ? ), and not to give accounts to people who are on "Great Index of Spammers - year XXXX". :))) but this happens only in heaven :( > well..some of the customers wants to get those mails (yes...it's the > truth...I don't know why, I think they're happy to receive email ;)) :))))) > The only way to stop this is, to get a position in the contract between > service provider and PoP, or between service provider and customers, that > the PoP and/or the customer are billed for such traffic. > You know, "money makes the world go round". special fees for spamming ? :) > >> One (technical) idea can be, to install two smtp server: > > > >All this does is stop you relaying. You can do this on one server > >with the no relay patches on > > http://www.sendmail.org/ > >if you can get the IP address stuff to work right, though we use > >two servers for other reasons. > > well...we're changing our internal network to a secure server network > (SSN). So, my second smtp server is in this SSN and the first smtp server > is in front of that network. so, our second smtp can go out, but no one can > get in and use my second smtp for relaying :) yes, but his is solution for a company not for ISP [ when u are at end of line ]. not when u've got connection to 2 or more AS's. Miroslaw Jaworski ___________________________________________________________________________ Miroslaw.Jaworski(a)ikp.com.pl (Psyborg) MJ102-RIPE ATM S.A. - IKP division WAN/UNIX adm

3 2

unsubscribe
by Gregory Dmitriev 01 Oct '97

01 Oct '97

unsubscribe

1 0

Re: More on spamming..
by Miroslaw Jaworski 01 Oct '97

01 Oct '97

On Wed, 1 Oct 1997, Javier Llopis wrote: > The only legal loophole would be if ISPs put a disuasive price for spamming > practices in their service contract. A price so high that no spammer would > pay. Then spammers would be invoiced, and the invoice would become unpaid > after the invoice due date. thats the end of idea... 'black books' shouldn't be accessible by everyone. Rules, only rules ( what is spam, what u can do, what is 'illegal' ) should be published. Spammer can pay i dont know ... maybe in ripe ... for example . standard fee can be for example 1000$ for documented. all this is ..maybe... maybe... its beginning of good idea. i know that logs are not a proof. but logs from hundred servers which were 'attacked' with SPAM - it can be base to adding such a company to 'black list'. Such a list should be accessible only by ISP. > Publishing a list of people who won't pay you is not illegal as long as the > debt is well documented (with the invoice) nor is denying service because of > being on that list. (We could have legal problems anyway, but the case would > be harder for the spammer) And the only way out of the list would be paying > the bill. thats right. MJ ___________________________________________________________________________ Miroslaw.Jaworski(a)ikp.com.pl (Psyborg) MJ102-RIPE ATM S.A. - IKP division WAN/UNIX adm

1 0

Re: More on spamming..
by aw＠eunet.ch 01 Oct '97

01 Oct '97

Miroslaw.Jaworski wrote: > On Wed, 1 Oct 1997, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > > >and what to do ? tell customers "sorry u generate spam, we don't want u > > >on our server" ? > > > > Yes. > > i want to :) but i work for ISP :) > > > >OK, but a couple hours later he will get new accounts from other ISP. > > If he hits you, you tell that ISP: "stop this customer please", if they > > don't you blackhole their route. > > then many customers are wining "Why can't I.... ??!!Why did You ??!! > What with my e-mail ???!!".... :( > > > YES, that's what this entire discussion is about. > > yes. > > yes. > > Wow.. triple YES for me :) like in voting couple years ago in my country :) > > so... there is an idea. there is an beginning of solution.. > who can accept it ? > maybe we can try to create such a document which should be signed by > every existing and every new ISP ? > Interestingly enough, I reported to a major ISP recently (no names) a considerable problem with a spammer hijacking one of our machines. Traces showedup the originating machine, one on their lines a few domain levels down, and asked them to do something about it, or we would have to, in a way which would affect all their traffic to us. Their response was "Thank you for your interest, but this is not our problem. We rely on our client's discression for their correct use of the internet". So, who's gonna sign this lovely document? Aleks With kind regards Aleksandr Wilansky; The comments in the above mail are my own, and in no way reflect company policy........ === ____ === hostmaster(a)eunet.ch === / / / ___ ___ _/_ === EUnet AG === /---- / / / / /___/ / === Zweierstrasse 35 === /____ /___/ / / /___ / === CH-8004 Zuerich ===== ===== Tel. +41 1 298 60 30 ===== Connecting Europe since 1982 ===== Fax +41 1 291 46 42 "In a world without fences, who needs Gates?"

1 0

Re: More on spamming..
by Chris Panayis 01 Oct '97

01 Oct '97

We do not allow external mail relaying and encourage our customers to do the same. Is this the same for the big ISPs too? Regards Chris Panayis Freedom To Surf plc

1 0