Re: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?

[Benjamin Billon]

Maybe I'm wrong on this, and I'm not a mailadmin anywhere nor have I been or 
pretended to have been in the past. But I'm pretty sure FB only sends you mail 
based on the prefrences you choose, and I know this is the answer you where 
given so mostly a statement. How does that equal spam :)
   
Invitations. Kind of Bulk. Never asked. Unwanted. Coming again and 
again. Boring. Spam. They keep storing email addresses without their 
consent. Not even mentioning project Titan.
If FB users sends emails to themselves, that's their problem indeed. If 
they complain about these emails, that's FB problem to have dumb users.
If recipients with nothing to do with FB receive unwanted emails, that's 
FB problem to find a way to stop that.

Re: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?

[Shon Elliott]

Yep. I understand that. Which is why I asked if anyone from Facebook or Spamcop
was lurking around. Since Facebook knows they have an issue, how about hearing
from someone over there at Facebook regarding this issue? Like it or not,
Facebook is a very popular service. Regardless whether they use it for good or
bad purposes, it is what it is, and both innocent and not-so-innocent people use
it. That in itself makes this a huge dilemma that I hope someone from Facebook
would be lurking here might address.  As others have said in this thread,
Facebook only sends e-mail you specifically approve.. I'm just saying something
before my customers call me to complain about it... and I know they will.

-S


Reed Loden wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:14:37 -0800
> Shon Elliott  wrote:
> 
>> Anyone from Facebook or Spamcop lurking around to look into this? It's quite
>> annoying.. I can't imagine how many other users are scratching their heads on
>> this one...
> 
> I'm a long-time SpamCop member, so I forwarded your mail to the
> deputies. They are aware that facebook's servers have been
> sporadically listed, and one of them specifically said the following:
> 
> "Not much we can do about the listings.  They're sending spam to our 
> traps in large enough numbers that raises the score to a listing level. 
>   If Facebook were to follow best practices the spam complaints and
> trap hits would drop to levels that keeps them from getting listed."
> 
> ~reed
> 

Re: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?

[Matthew Dodd]

Hmm this just me of this post, where supposedly Facebook will be making the 
move into Webmail for its users. Interesting. Coincidence or not!?!?

http://techcrunch.com/2010/02/05/facebooks-project-titan-a-full-featured-webmail-product/

-Matt Dodd

On Feb 26, 2010, at 1:12 AM, deles...@gmail.com wrote:

> Maybe I'm wrong on this, and I'm not a mailadmin anywhere nor have I been or 
> pretended to have been in the past. But I'm pretty sure FB only sends you 
> mail based on the prefrences you choose, and I know this is the answer you 
> where given so mostly a statement. How does that equal spam :)
> --Original Message--
> From: Reed Loden
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?
> Sent: Feb 26, 2010 12:46 AM
> 
> On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:14:37 -0800
> Shon Elliott  wrote:
> 
>> Anyone from Facebook or Spamcop lurking around to look into this? It's quite
>> annoying.. I can't imagine how many other users are scratching their heads on
>> this one...
> 
> I'm a long-time SpamCop member, so I forwarded your mail to the
> deputies. They are aware that facebook's servers have been
> sporadically listed, and one of them specifically said the following:
> 
> "Not much we can do about the listings.  They're sending spam to our 
> traps in large enough numbers that raises the score to a listing level. 
>  If Facebook were to follow best practices the spam complaints and
> trap hits would drop to levels that keeps them from getting listed."
> 
> ~reed
> 
> -- 
> Reed Loden - 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network

Re: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?

[deleskie]

Maybe I'm wrong on this, and I'm not a mailadmin anywhere nor have I been or 
pretended to have been in the past. But I'm pretty sure FB only sends you mail 
based on the prefrences you choose, and I know this is the answer you where 
given so mostly a statement. How does that equal spam :)
--Original Message--
From: Reed Loden
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?
Sent: Feb 26, 2010 12:46 AM

On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:14:37 -0800
Shon Elliott  wrote:

> Anyone from Facebook or Spamcop lurking around to look into this? It's quite
> annoying.. I can't imagine how many other users are scratching their heads on
> this one...

I'm a long-time SpamCop member, so I forwarded your mail to the
deputies. They are aware that facebook's servers have been
sporadically listed, and one of them specifically said the following:

"Not much we can do about the listings.  They're sending spam to our 
traps in large enough numbers that raises the score to a listing level. 
  If Facebook were to follow best practices the spam complaints and
trap hits would drop to levels that keeps them from getting listed."

~reed

-- 
Reed Loden - 



Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network

Re: ISP in Johannesburg in Southdafrika

[Graham Beneke]

On 26/02/2010 04:08, Randy Bush wrote:

Internet connectivity here in 'deepest darkest Africa' is actually quite
advanced ;-)


and the most expensive you can imagine.  welcome to a telkom monopoly.


The monopoly is over! There are now over 300 licensed operators and the 
infrastructure build-out is busy happening right now.


Most of the major metro areas have at least 4 carrier grade access 
networks fighting for your business and there are hundreds of small 
operators and connectivity providers that will sell you services at 
various SLAs.


:-)

--
Graham Beneke

Re: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?

[Noel Butler]

On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 22:46 -0600, Reed Loden wrote:

> On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:14:37 -0800
> Shon Elliott  wrote:
> 
> > Anyone from Facebook or Spamcop lurking around to look into this? It's quite
> > annoying.. I can't imagine how many other users are scratching their heads 
> > on
> > this one...
> 
> I'm a long-time SpamCop member, so I forwarded your mail to the
> deputies. They are aware that facebook's servers have been
> sporadically listed, and one of them specifically said the following:
> 
> "Not much we can do about the listings.  They're sending spam to our 
> traps in large enough numbers that raises the score to a listing level. 
>   If Facebook were to follow best practices the spam complaints and
> trap hits would drop to levels that keeps them from getting listed."
> 



That's more than fair IMO
not forgetting facebook is full of wankers, so they just have one more
avenue to spam/harras do the usual miscreant things, so I bloody well
hope no DNSBL whitelists or gives them (or anyone) preferential
treatment



> ~reed
> 

Re: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?

[Reed Loden]

On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:14:37 -0800
Shon Elliott  wrote:

> Anyone from Facebook or Spamcop lurking around to look into this? It's quite
> annoying.. I can't imagine how many other users are scratching their heads on
> this one...

I'm a long-time SpamCop member, so I forwarded your mail to the
deputies. They are aware that facebook's servers have been
sporadically listed, and one of them specifically said the following:

"Not much we can do about the listings.  They're sending spam to our 
traps in large enough numbers that raises the score to a listing level. 
  If Facebook were to follow best practices the spam complaints and
trap hits would drop to levels that keeps them from getting listed."

~reed

-- 
Reed Loden - 

RE: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?

[Adam Stasiniewicz]

Found this: http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=10783

Looks like SpamCop is fully aware they are listing facebook's email
servers.


-Original Message-
From: Shon Elliott [mailto:s...@unwiredbb.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 9:15 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org >> nanog
Subject: Spamcop Blocks Facebook?


So I start trying to figure out why my facebook account keeps saying my
e-mail
is invalid, when I know it isn't. I look at my mail server and see it's
all
running just fine, and have been receiving mail from others just fine...
so I
tail the log and tell Facebook to re-confirm the address...

Feb 25 19:08:18 postfix/smtpd[12682]: connect from
outmail011.snc1.tfbnw.net[69.63.178.170]
Feb 25 19:08:18 postfix/smtpd[12682]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
outmail011.snc1.tfbnw.net[69.63.178.170]: 554 5.7.1 Service unavailable;
Client
host [69.63.178.170] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see
http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?69.63.178.170;
from= to=
proto=ESMTP helo=
Feb 25 19:08:23 postfix/smtpd[12682]: disconnect from
outmail011.snc1.tfbnw.net[69.63.178.170]



Anyone from Facebook or Spamcop lurking around to look into this? It's
quite
annoying.. I can't imagine how many other users are scratching their heads
on
this one...

-S

Spamcop Blocks Facebook?

[Shon Elliott]

So I start trying to figure out why my facebook account keeps saying my e-mail
is invalid, when I know it isn't. I look at my mail server and see it's all
running just fine, and have been receiving mail from others just fine... so I
tail the log and tell Facebook to re-confirm the address...

Feb 25 19:08:18 postfix/smtpd[12682]: connect from
outmail011.snc1.tfbnw.net[69.63.178.170]
Feb 25 19:08:18 postfix/smtpd[12682]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
outmail011.snc1.tfbnw.net[69.63.178.170]: 554 5.7.1 Service unavailable; Client
host [69.63.178.170] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see
http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?69.63.178.170;
from= to=
proto=ESMTP helo=
Feb 25 19:08:23 postfix/smtpd[12682]: disconnect from
outmail011.snc1.tfbnw.net[69.63.178.170]



Anyone from Facebook or Spamcop lurking around to look into this? It's quite
annoying.. I can't imagine how many other users are scratching their heads on
this one...

-S

Re: ISP in Johannesburg in Southdafrika

[Patrick W. Gilmore]

On Feb 25, 2010, at 9:39 PM, Daniel Senie wrote:

> Better than western Massachusetts, where there's just no connectivity at all. 
> Even dialup fails to function over crappy lines. I'd take monopoly pricing 
> over no connectivity, I guess.

Oh, plz, if you were willing to pay $2K/Mbps, they'd trench fiber to your 
house.  Still think monopoly pricing is better?

Of course, that was 2008.  I hear prices have dropped to the Amazingly Low Sum 
of just $350/Mbps in 2010 - in certain places, if you're lucky, and sign a long 
term contract.  I bet there are 10 people reading this post who will run you a 
DS3 or better if you sign up for $350/Mbps.

-- 
TTFN,
patrick


> On Feb 25, 2010, at 9:08 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> 
>>> Internet connectivity here in 'deepest darkest Africa' is actually quite
>>> advanced ;-)
>> 
>> and the most expensive you can imagine.  welcome to a telkom monopoly.
>> 
>> randy
> 
> 

Re: ISP in Johannesburg in Southdafrika

[Daniel Senie]

Better than western Massachusetts, where there's just no connectivity at all. 
Even dialup fails to function over crappy lines. I'd take monopoly pricing over 
no connectivity, I guess.

On Feb 25, 2010, at 9:08 PM, Randy Bush wrote:

>> Internet connectivity here in 'deepest darkest Africa' is actually quite
>> advanced ;-)
> 
> and the most expensive you can imagine.  welcome to a telkom monopoly.
> 
> randy

Re: ISP in Johannesburg in Southdafrika

[Randy Bush]

> Internet connectivity here in 'deepest darkest Africa' is actually quite
> advanced ;-)

and the most expensive you can imagine.  welcome to a telkom monopoly.

randy

Re: ATT / Bellsouth Email Feedback Loop

[Daniel Gibby]

> I have searched and I can not find out definitively whether ATT has or
> does not has a feedback loop system. Anyone out there know?

It would be wonderful if they had a feedback loop. 
We've done research recently and found no evidence that they have one. 
At least they do have the IP removal tool... not that it does much. 
I'm afraid it just makes it so you get the privilege of using their 
IP removal tool again sometime soon. 
Or you could not send any emails to them, and your delivery would be 100%.. 
or would that be null..

Does Savvis have Peering Issues (Santa Clara, Virginia)

[Haarith Devarajan]

Hi,

 

After the last few savvis maintenance upgrades, We constantly keep
seeing latency issues on our external monitors.

When I look it up on some common monitors like
http://www.internetpulse.net/

It shows very high latency and some packet loss from Savvis to almost
most vendors.

 

When we escalate this to Savvis, they say we don't escalate tickets
based on external monitors.

We are not able to reproduce any timeouts but can see general increase
in latency.

 

Does any one else see similar issues and fixed it.

 

Appreciate any help,

Cheers

Haarith

 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE 
===
This email message and any attachments are for the exclusive use of the 
intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.  
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you 
are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and 
destroy all copies of the original message along with any attachments, from 
your computer system.  If you are the intended recipient, please be advised 
that the content of this message is subject to access, review and disclosure by 
the sender's Email System Administrator.

Re: Competition for Internap's FCP product.

[Kevin Loch]

Drew Weaver wrote:

Hi,

As my Avaya CNA/Route Science box begins to seriously age, and without the 
support of Avaya for 'Service Provider' uses of the product, I have been 
looking for alternatives to the product.

The value we get from this product is mainly in the ability to easily manage 
our bandwidth commitments in a hands off way without having to manually 
manipulate anything. I have no real illusions that the 'performance' side of 
things is 'arguable' at best with these sorts of products due to the nature of 
the Internet.

Internap to me stands out as essentially the only alternative to this product, but they have been tremendously difficult to work with, they won't allow us to demo a unit to see if it offers the same functionality as our current solution. The reason they won't allow us to a demo a unit is because they 'don't stock them'. So basically they have 0 units until someone orders one, that is fine if that is their policy but that hasn't really been our experience with other hardware vendors that want close to 100K for a piece of niche equipment. 


My questions are:

-What are other people doing who currently use or used the Avaya/RS product in 
the past?
-Does anyone know of any competition in this space (aside from hiring a guy 
that sits there and does this for us manually)?
-Has Cisco's OER/PFR made any progress in the last few years (is anyone using 
it?)


We use the Avaya CNA in one data center and it does an excellent job at
both commit management and rerouting around problems.  I almost never
see tickets regarding latency/packet loss at that data center except
when it involves inbound issues that the CNA can't fix.  Other data
centers have a more typical occurrence of routing issues that require
manual intervention.

Most of the parts to replace this exist in open source software today:

bird/quagga for bgp to import routes and inject re-routes.
net-snmp-utils for importing interface stats/state and bgp session state
various performance testing tools [tcp]traceroute/mtr etc.
netflow tools (like ehnt) to receive netflow data

The parts that are missing:

api for bird/quagga to import and assert routes
code to use netflow to generate list of targets for performance testing
  and to determine bandwidth/route for commit management
code to decide which routes to assert to which next-hop based on 
configured performance and commit levels.

reporting

None of that seems very tricky, especially the commit management which
does not need a sophisticated performance evaluation, just "does it
work at all via that link."

- Kevin

RE: Competition for Internap's FCP product.

[Holmes,David A]

The ability to manage bandwidth over multiple ISP links each of which
may charge variable rates per Mb, and also be billed by the 95th
percentile billing method, is the main justification for a device like
the Routescience product. In my experience ROI is captured in a
relatively short time.  Since Routescience uses the second and third
packets of the TCP 3-way handshake to calculate the fastest route to
destination prefixes, then this is an added bonus to the ability to dial
bandwidth up or down over numerous ISP links.

Also Routescience-type devices free up the person who sits and
calculates BGP best routes manually, so that person can perform more
productive and efficient work in other areas.



-Original Message-
From: Rubens Kuhl [mailto:rube...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 11:23 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Competition for Internap's FCP product.

Is your burstable bandwidth cost high enough to pay 100K for a gear
just to meet the commitments ? NAGIOS/CACTI monitoring alerts sent to
someone (which may be hired help from any place in the world) would
probably beat that in cost effectiveness.

The performance requirement is where a line is drawn between manual
configuration and automated BGP manipulation.


Rubens


On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Drew Weaver 
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As my Avaya CNA/Route Science box begins to seriously age, and without
the support of Avaya for 'Service Provider' uses of the product, I have
been looking for alternatives to the product.
>
> The value we get from this product is mainly in the ability to easily
manage our bandwidth commitments in a hands off way without having to
manually manipulate anything. I have no real illusions that the
'performance' side of things is 'arguable' at best with these sorts of
products due to the nature of the Internet.
>
> Internap to me stands out as essentially the only alternative to this
product, but they have been tremendously difficult to work with, they
won't allow us to demo a unit to see if it offers the same functionality
as our current solution. The reason they won't allow us to a demo a unit
is because they 'don't stock them'. So basically they have 0 units until
someone orders one, that is fine if that is their policy but that hasn't
really been our experience with other hardware vendors that want close
to 100K for a piece of niche equipment.
>
> My questions are:
>
> -What are other people doing who currently use or used the Avaya/RS
product in the past?
> -Does anyone know of any competition in this space (aside from hiring
a guy that sits there and does this for us manually)?
> -Has Cisco's OER/PFR made any progress in the last few years (is
anyone using it?)
>
> Sorry to disturb,
>
> -Drew
>
>
>

Re: Competition for Internap's FCP product.

[Rubens Kuhl]

Is your burstable bandwidth cost high enough to pay 100K for a gear
just to meet the commitments ? NAGIOS/CACTI monitoring alerts sent to
someone (which may be hired help from any place in the world) would
probably beat that in cost effectiveness.

The performance requirement is where a line is drawn between manual
configuration and automated BGP manipulation.


Rubens


On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Drew Weaver  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As my Avaya CNA/Route Science box begins to seriously age, and without the 
> support of Avaya for 'Service Provider' uses of the product, I have been 
> looking for alternatives to the product.
>
> The value we get from this product is mainly in the ability to easily manage 
> our bandwidth commitments in a hands off way without having to manually 
> manipulate anything. I have no real illusions that the 'performance' side of 
> things is 'arguable' at best with these sorts of products due to the nature 
> of the Internet.
>
> Internap to me stands out as essentially the only alternative to this 
> product, but they have been tremendously difficult to work with, they won't 
> allow us to demo a unit to see if it offers the same functionality as our 
> current solution. The reason they won't allow us to a demo a unit is because 
> they 'don't stock them'. So basically they have 0 units until someone orders 
> one, that is fine if that is their policy but that hasn't really been our 
> experience with other hardware vendors that want close to 100K for a piece of 
> niche equipment.
>
> My questions are:
>
> -What are other people doing who currently use or used the Avaya/RS product 
> in the past?
> -Does anyone know of any competition in this space (aside from hiring a guy 
> that sits there and does this for us manually)?
> -Has Cisco's OER/PFR made any progress in the last few years (is anyone using 
> it?)
>
> Sorry to disturb,
>
> -Drew
>
>
>

Re: ATT / Bellsouth Email Feedback Loop

[Bob Poortinga]

Wade Peacock  writes:
 
> We have found ATT to be heavy handed with their email (spam) filtering. 
> Without warn all of our mail servers will be denied from delivering email 
> to their many domains (att.net, bellsouth.net, etc). They have a removal 
> request form (like most other large ISPs) which takes 2 days to process. We 
> never find out why the we get listed.

We have dealt with issue in the past.  AT&T maintains an internal
blacklist and their blacklist policies are not published.  There is
also no feedback loop mechanism in place, AFAICT.  I do know that
sending backscatter to AT&T will get you in their blacklist.  If your
server sends NDRs instead for rejecting during the SMTP transaction
for 5xx type messages then that is probably what got you on their list.

The email address we have used at AT&T to resolve these issues is:
.  Make sure that all of issues which caused
your blacklisting are resolved because if they put you on the list again,
it is much tougher to get removed.

-- 
Bob Poortinga  K9SQL
Bloomington, Indiana  US

Re: ATT / Bellsouth Email Feedback Loop

[Jim Popovitch]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:00, Wade Peacock  wrote:
> Greetings Brain Trust,
>
> We have found ATT to be heavy handed with their email (spam) filtering.
> Without warn all of our mail servers will be denied from delivering email to
> their many domains (att.net, bellsouth.net, etc). They have a removal
> request form (like most other large ISPs) which takes 2 days to process. We
> never find out why the we get listed. We always check as many "email"
> reputation systems and rbl searches to determine why.  Everywhere we
> look we see no evidence of a problem. We have joined other ISP feedback look
> system, (AOL, Yahoo and even Hotmail/Live) which all have helped stop issues
> (comprised accounts, bots, etc) before they get to the point of a
> listing/block.
>
> I have searched and I can not find out definitively whether ATT has or does
> not has a feedback loop system. Anyone out there know?

I know of no ATT FBL system.

If you are getting ATT rejects, then you can enter some info here:
http://worldnet.att.net/general-info/block_admin.html

However, if you are getting blackhole'd you have no recourse, IMHO.

If any AT&T rep wants to step forward, I've know a few people waiting
in the wings with very similar issues.  One even suggested the
blackhole'ing is related to American Idol, as you need to keep your
pipes clean for those revenue generating SMS texts.  ;-)

-Jim P.

ATT / Bellsouth Email Feedback Loop

[Wade Peacock]

Greetings Brain Trust,

We have found ATT to be heavy handed with their email (spam) filtering. Without warn all of our mail servers 
will be denied from delivering email to their many domains (att.net, bellsouth.net, etc). They have a removal 
request form (like most other large ISPs) which takes 2 days to process. We never find out why the we get 
listed. We always check as many "email" reputation systems and rbl searches to determine why.  Everywhere we
look we see no evidence of a problem. We have joined other ISP feedback look system, (AOL, Yahoo and even 
Hotmail/Live) which all have helped stop issues (comprised accounts, bots, etc) before they get to the point 
of a listing/block.


I have searched and I can not find out definitively whether ATT has or does not has a feedback loop system. 
Anyone out there know?



--
Wade Peacock
Network Administrator

Sun Country Cablevision Ltd
Sunwave Internet Department
Tel: (250) 832-9711 or (250) 546-9667
Web: http://www.sunwave.net
Email: wade.peac...@sunwave.net
Support Email: supp...@sunwave.net

Re: ISP in Johannesburg in Southdafrika

[graham]

On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 14:07:49 +0100, "Xaver Aerni"  wrote:
> We are looking for this year a Provider in Johannesburg for a temporay
> Internetconnection for 1 Mounth during the WM 2010. Does somebody know a
> Provider which has stabile line there. With speed 2 Mb or more.
(guarantie)

Internet connectivity here in 'deepest darkest Africa' is actually quite
advanced ;-)

Would you like that on Fibre, Microwave, DSL or some other technology?

-- 
Graham Beneke

Competition for Internap's FCP product.

[Drew Weaver]

Hi,

As my Avaya CNA/Route Science box begins to seriously age, and without the 
support of Avaya for 'Service Provider' uses of the product, I have been 
looking for alternatives to the product.

The value we get from this product is mainly in the ability to easily manage 
our bandwidth commitments in a hands off way without having to manually 
manipulate anything. I have no real illusions that the 'performance' side of 
things is 'arguable' at best with these sorts of products due to the nature of 
the Internet.

Internap to me stands out as essentially the only alternative to this product, 
but they have been tremendously difficult to work with, they won't allow us to 
demo a unit to see if it offers the same functionality as our current solution. 
The reason they won't allow us to a demo a unit is because they 'don't stock 
them'. So basically they have 0 units until someone orders one, that is fine if 
that is their policy but that hasn't really been our experience with other 
hardware vendors that want close to 100K for a piece of niche equipment. 

My questions are:

-What are other people doing who currently use or used the Avaya/RS product in 
the past?
-Does anyone know of any competition in this space (aside from hiring a guy 
that sits there and does this for us manually)?
-Has Cisco's OER/PFR made any progress in the last few years (is anyone using 
it?)

Sorry to disturb,

-Drew