Alessandro Vesely <vesely(_at_)tana(_dot_)it> wrote:
On 25/Jan/11 22:14, John Leslie wrote:
Reputation (as the name implies) is a prediction of the likelihood of
near-future behavior.
Better yet, a prediction of the likelihood of a certain kind of
response to complaints and abuse reports.
I am sympathetic to that, but that too can change on short notice;
and many admins aren't volunteering to blindly accept the spam load
until that runs its course.
Bot-herders, if they know that timeframe, could easily adjust their
spam-runs to finish before the deadline, leaving no actual useful action
for the admins to take.
(And the time-frame to actually _clear_ a botted computer is insanely
long...)
This is why I look to temporary errors as the appropriate action
during an incident.
Any host might be taken down, hijacked, circumvented, or otherwise
abused for sending spam, what makes a difference is whether it has
an abuse team who is willing and capable of countering that.
That does make _an_ important difference, but not one sufficient
for most admins to blindly accept the spam load during an incident.
_Reputation_ is a measure of such will and capacity.
"Your Network / Your Rules" applies, of course...
But to me, "reputation" needs to suffer during the interim before
corrective action is completed.
OTOH, in the absence of a useful abuse-team, reputation shold _stay_
bad for a rather long time. IMHO, of course...
Which is why I consider "vouching" services so important.
--
John Leslie <john(_at_)jlc(_dot_)net>
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg