On Thu, 30 Mar 2006, Nick Nicholas wrote:
On Thursday, March 30, 2006 at 8:49 AM Tony Finch wrote:
DNSBLs are not only useful, they are crucial.
I'm not disagreeing with you, in fact I agree wholeheartedly. However,
does any empirical data exist to support this assertion? I think we
What sort of data did you want to see? Something about the average success
rates and false positive rates over all DNSBLs? Or an analysis of one or a
couple? When I looked, I found that most DNSBLs blocked little spam, but
that the best were quite effective. Is it sufficient to show that the best
are well run, or do we have to show that all are?
Neither statistic addresses what the state of the spam situation would be
if DNSBLs did not exist, since they are a powerfull tool discouraging MTAs
from spewing.
will need some solid data to support such a position in order to refute
the Church I-D. Emprical data of this nature also would be useful for
the DNSBL BCP.
Again, I'm not arguing against you. I just want to make the strongest
case possible to support this position. Just making the assertion won't
be sufficient.
Regards,
Nick
--
Nick Nicholas
Knowledge Engineer
Habeas Inc.
650-694-3320
nick(_at_)habeas(_dot_)com
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg