Re: FW: Resolution of Spam
- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 14:22:23 +0100
On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 01:49:43PM +0100, Sabri Berisha wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Mar 2002 paul@localhost wrote:
> > Seems Level3 doesn't deal with abuse complaints, just passes them down to
> > professional spam outfits below them and that's it. Not really a resolution
> > in my book.
> Additionally, don't forget the massive amount of spam complaints routed to
> abuse@localhost or abuse@localhost. It takes a lot of time/manpower to
> handle these complaints
In this particular case, the spam from 126.96.36.199/24 started on
25 Feb and never stopped, up to now. Here they are trying to reach
addresses which have been dead for three years. They are also
causing a growth of the queues because of undeliverable bounces.
If Level3 allows spammers to go on continuously for 15 days, it is
not surprising that they get a massive amount of spam complaints!
The complaints volume can be drastically decreased by cutting spammers
quickly. Isn't that too obvious to be stated?
Of course we use filters. We use filters whenever a spammer is
on a badly run network which is uncapable or unwilling to take action.
Networks like Level3, Sprint or C&W inflict additional costs for the rest