[Scrouting] Re: DTI-NET 218.225.224.0/19

[Sam Trappe]

Em Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:05:34 -0700, "Mike Easter" <MikeE at ster.invalid>
escreveu o seguinte:

I decided to unblock you, and reload the spool. Unsuprisingly, you
replied.

>Sam Trappe wrote:
>
>> 3. The .routing newsgroup is cluttered by responses from some (well,
>> one, really), who has no ability to make changes, but muddies the
>> water sufficiently (such as in his not helpful reply to your question)
>> that the overworked .routing staff/volunteers overlook your question.
>
>I disagree with that one.
>
> -1- .routing isn't 'cluttered' with responses by me; 7 in 60 posts
> -2- whatever responses I make don't interfere with whatever the routing
>deputy wants to do with/about someone's post here

We'll have to agree to disagree.

>I think it would be great if someone could learn/adopt the spamcop routing
>philosophy and then would be able to contribute positively to routing in a
>way that makes the powers-that-be happy.  To me, that seems like a
>difficult dynamic.

I think it would be great if SOME response to routing requests, other
than from you, would be made, and when you have nothing to add, you
keep your opinions to yourself. But that's just me. I do wish you
would just do me the great coutesy of killfiling me, so you are not
tempted to reply. I promise to henceforth not even hint at your
existence. Is that too much to ask?

I also think it would be great if MORE attention was paid to proper
reporting (where proper = as defined in abuse.net) than is currently
the case. As a paid subscriber, I expect at least some effort in this
regard.

Finally, I find it interesting that my original post, to which you
(sadly) replied, was not reloaded when I reloaded the spooled
messages. I admit to not being sure what this means, nor have I done
any experiments to diagnose.

For the record, here's my original post:

Em Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:23:01 +0900, Patto <nobody at devnull.spamcop.net>
escreveu o seguinte:

>Mike Easter wrote:
>> Tim McGraw wrote:
>> 
>>> I just did a test where I stuck http://www.eroisensei.info/acc.html, a
>>> DTI-hosted site, into the middle of an unrelated spamitem, and the
>>> parser would notify nic-db at dti.ad.jp for that site, so I'm not sure what
>>> your beef is.
>> 
>> Patto wants to notify username abuse instead of the jp.nic listed contacts
>> for admin/tech.  Going for abuse is abuse.net's reg.
>> 
>> a. [Network Number]             210.159.128.0/18
>> b. [Network Name]               DTI-NET
>> g. [Organization]               DREAM TRAIN INTERNET
>> m. [Administrative Contact]     MH4804JP
>> n. [Technical Contact]          MK10931JP
>> 
>> MH4804JP = nic-db at dti.ad.jp
>> MK10931JP =  nic-db at dti.ad.jp
>> 
>> whois -h whois.abuse.net dti.ad.jp ...
>> abuse at dti.ad.jp (for dti.ad.jp)
>> 
>> It would seem to me to be dti's call, if they have gone to the trouble to
>> communicate with SC.  Maybe they want 'generic' notifies to go to abuse
>> (ergo reg with abuse.net) and SC's to go to nic-db.  Or something.
>> 
>> DTI has a record at spamhaus of 2 /32s for hosting the ROKSO AWG aka
>> youngjoo aka qline and that record has been there since 2006.
>> 
>> http://www.spamhaus.org/rokso/evidence.lasso?rokso_id=ROK6026  Japanese
>> spammers of "deai-kei" or "dating" spam.  But "deai" is a euphamism for
>> prostitution in Japan. Their services also include pornography
>> distribution. The spam is aimed at the Japanese market, with character
>> sets in Japanese, so the spam often appears illegible, or simply filled
>> with "?????", to western computer displays.
>> 
>> Spamhaus has a lot more about the rokso's relationship with its providers.
>> 
>> For me, I don't buy Patto's philosophy about notifying providers which
>> don't want to be notified or are known to be unresponsive.  My philosophy
>> is "Don't notify a provider unless there is some evidence that the notify
>> would be of benefit."  Useless notifies are of absolutely no benefit to
>> anyone.
>> 
>> I think Patto's philosophy is, "You can beat a provider into submission if
>> you notify them enough."  Further, "There is no such thing as a useless
>> notify."
>
>All I want is that the notify is going to the *correct* address, not the 
>wrong one; nic-db is obviously the guy that maintains DTI-NET's own 
>domain registration.
>
>Why is it absolutely not possible to send it to the abuse address?

SC's dismal record of updates [1] to routing errors seems to have
multiple sources:

1. It has been often written that there is a lack of staff (paid or
volunteer) to research and process changes.

2. As a change (by my observation) from the original SC philosophy,
accurate spam reporting is less important than accurately feeding IPs
to thre SCBL.

a. Some research (e.g., Al Iverson's), shows the SCBL to be pretty
good these days.

b. While this optimization away from reporting towards routing may
make perfect sense economically from Ironport, it is contrary to what
paying SC customers, such as myself, were promised when we signed up
(for me, quite some time ago).

3. The .routing newsgroup is cluttered by responses from some (well,
one, really), who has no ability to make changes, but muddies the
water sufficiently (such as in his not helpful reply to your question)
that the overworked .routing staff/volunteers overlook your question.

FOR THE RECORD, I'd be glad to offer some time to be part of the
.routing volunteer group (perhaps it is a group of one). Besides being
Chief Architect for a Division of a very large multinational IT
company (3rd largest, in revenue), with 30 years of IT experience, I
provide volunteer support for two other anti-spam organizations and am
a member of a couple of related technical committees. I'd be happy to
discuss my bona fides outside the group, if anyone from SC would care
to respond. My personal email address is on record; reply-to works
just fine, too.

[1] I've given up posting to .routing due to lack of even a reply from
anyone with the ability to make a change (staff or volunteer). 

P.S. No offense, but, as I have explained to him, I have ME killfilled
here and on USENET to improve the S/N. So, replies from him will not
be noticed, so hopefully won't occur.

--
Replies by posting preferred. All spam reported

--
Replies by posting preferred. All spam reported