nanog mailing list archives
RE: amazonaws.com?
From: <michael.dillon () bt com>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 08:57:05 +0100
So to get Amazon to police their customers either requires regulation or an external economic pressure. Blocking AWS from folk's mail servers would apply some pressure,
No it would not. That is what AWS wants you to to.
making areas of the net go dark to AWS would apply more pressure faster. A considerable amount of pressure could be placed by a big enough money damages lawsuit but that has a feedback delay of months to years.
And such lawsuits can go both ways. As soon as a company moves beyond protective blocking of port 25, to punitive blocking of all traffic from AWS, they run the risk of being the target of a damages lawsuit. Not to mention complaints from their own customers. There simply is no simple solution to this problem. --Michael Dillon
Current thread:
- Re: amazonaws.com?, (continued)
- Re: amazonaws.com? Suresh Ramasubramanian (May 26)
- Re: amazonaws.com? Colin Alston (May 26)
- Re: amazonaws.com? Suresh Ramasubramanian (May 26)
- Re: amazonaws.com? Dorn Hetzel (May 26)
- RE: amazonaws.com? michael.dillon (May 27)
- Re: amazonaws.com? Ian Mason (May 29)
- Re: amazonaws.com? Paul Vixie (May 29)
- RE: amazonaws.com? michael.dillon (May 30)
- Re: amazonaws.com? Colin Alston (May 27)
- RE: amazonaws.com? michael.dillon (May 27)
- RE: amazonaws.com? Tony Finch (May 28)
- RE: amazonaws.com? michael.dillon (May 28)
- RE: amazonaws.com? Tony Finch (May 28)
- Re: amazonaws.com? Sargun Dhillon (May 28)
- Re: amazonaws.com? Steve Atkins (May 28)
- Re: amazonaws.com? Sargun Dhillon (May 28)
- RE: amazonaws.com? Skywing (May 28)