This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net/
[anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Suresh Ramasubramanian
ops.lists at gmail.com
Fri Mar 5 02:09:51 CET 2021
Since you brought up m3aawg I will note that it does have a best current practice for block lists which specifically declares that asking for payment for removal is not acceptable RIPE should consider only listing block lists that are managed according to accepted best practices https://www.m3aawg.org/sites/default/files/m3aawg-blocklist-help-bp-2018-02.pdf There are also blocklists that expect payment for delisting. M3AAWG strongly discourages the practice of blocklist operators charging delisting fees in any form; we acknowledge that under some exigent situations, listed entities may choose to pay such fees. For example, paying a delisting fee may be a viable option for senders who are able to quickly identify the underlying problem, solve it, and have no issue paying such fees. However, failure to identify and solve the problem sets the sender up for future listings and, thus, future delisting fees. Furthermore, a payment does not preclude future listings for repeated problems or different issues. --srs ________________________________ From: anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net> on behalf of Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> Sent: Friday, March 5, 2021 1:21:18 AM To: "Ángel González Berdasco" <angel.gonzalez at incibe.es> Cc: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget i think two things are being confused here; what the measurement folk find useful and what the anti-spam folk find useful. the ncc and ripe stat is not supplying the latter. it is the mail operators' choice of which anti-spam techniques to use, and i do that with one hat. but with a different hat i am interested in longitudinal measurement of internet infrastructure, anti-spam services being a small part of it. i suspect that what you really want is (for example) maawg to measure availibility and quality of *all* anti-spam services. while worthwhile, that is not the ripe stat's measurement mission. randy --- randy at psg.com `gpg --locate-external-keys --auto-key-locate wkd randy at psg.com` signatures are back, thanks to dmarc header mangling -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20210305/bc4c94dc/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]