[anti-abuse-wg] Spam FAQs need revision, was 2011-06 New Policy

Er - there's a huge difference between "cheap colo range with a /18
that's spread with snowshoe bulk mailers" and "comcast business ranges
with mostly individual static IP cablemodems allotted to different
businesses, with an ISP that practices what seems to be the gold
standard in outbound filtering of abuse from their IP space".   Our
filters at least tend not to block Comcast.

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 8:59 PM, russ at consumer.net <russ at consumer.net> wrote:
>>I do like to talk to the ISP and ensure that they address those issues
>> before I relax any filters.
>
> Right, you advocate a "I know abuse when I see it" standard where you have
> the final say and there is no recourse.  If anyone complains they must be a
> spammer or support spamming?  I am now on a Comcast Business IP.  At what
> point or at what level is too much abuse via the Comcast network to get all
> Comcast customers blocked?



-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists at gmail.com)