> No argument here, the problem (which was amplified by our service provider)
> is that they hit you (just like a spammer) when you least expect it and give
> you no opportunity to correct the situation. Your server gets referred to
> the list, they perform a test on your server and your added. You service
> provider is notified and goes nuts. You are left trying to figure out what
> happened and try to fix it as the 48 hour timer (set by the provider) is
> ticking away.
>
I agree, if the situation was explained and there was a good reason
to allow you more time I would certainly expect your provider to give
it to you. But once given the extension you should be expected to
live up to it without any questions. I also believe that one extension
to a policy is plenty.
Dave
> Open relays are no good. I get that part. But the methods taken are
> draconian at best. Our relay was open for 4 years, then one day we're
> 'ordered' to fix it within 48 hrs. Even the IRS works better than that.
>
> Frank
>
>
> >> Just a little note about these spam lists. Our server was placed on a list
> >> because we had an 'open' relay. OK.. not the best thing in world, but
> >> definitely not a felony. Because of the weight that this organization
> >
> > It may not be a felony but it does leave open an avenue for the exploitation
> > of other peoples networks and is negligent. This is the exact type of behavior
> > that these lists are out to prevent. If everyone went around with open
> > relays, spammers would have a heyday. The entire point is to help people
> become
> > responsible with their own networks. The resources are out there to help
> > novices get this cleared up.
> >
> > There is absolutely no excuse that I can think of for leaving an open
> > relay on the net. Its potentially harmful not only to your network but
> > to others as well.
> >
> >> carries, our service provider (PSI.net) gave us 48 hours to correct the
> >> situation or we'd be fully cuttoff from eMail. Unfortunately, it was
> >
> > Personally I praise PSI.net for their response to the issue.
> >
> >> extremely bad timing for our small business, and required an upgrade to our
> >> mailserver. All in all we spent about 5 hours originally earmarked for a
> >
> > This is where proper planning comes in. You need to know the software that you
> > are running and its limitations. You also need to know how to plug
> > potential security risks that are inherint in the software that you are
> > running. Being a systems administrator isn't all quake games :-)
> >
> > On a personal note, I feel for you and the problems that it can cause
> > being unprepared for something like this.
> >
> >> client trying to make everyone happy. We still have no confirmation that
> >> we've been removed from the spam list.
> >>
> >
> > This is one thing that if I were able I would change. Having some way of
> > knowing that you are off the list is definately important. I believe that
> > if the RBL is the list that blocked you then you can find out at
> > http://maps.vix.com. Last time I was there there was a tool to check.
> >
> >> The moral of the story? Although these lists are a great idea at first
> >> glance, they are run by organizations which are not accontable to any
> >> governing agency. Relying on their lists means that you are potentially
> >
> > Who would you want to be the governing agency ? ICANN ? NetSol? ARIN?
> > the US Government ? Who ? and who would pay them to babysit this ?
> >
> >> going to block out innocent companies (like ours) who have never sent spam
> >> and were only abused by one spammer, one time. There is no recourse and no
> >
> > Abuse is abuse. You may be innocent of spamming but you were guilty of
> > negligence. This can be as bad as the actual act itself.
> >> benefit of doubt given to the accused spammers.
> >>
> >> Frank
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Dave Costello
> >
>
>
> --
> Frank Martini Voice: 713/621-1917
> Cadence Development FAX: 713/621-1960
> 5075 Westheimer, Ste. 1266 eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Houston, Texas 77056 WWW: http://www.CadenceDevelopment.com/
>