Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

discuss - Re: [opennic-discuss] !ATTENTION! FurNIC Sponsored T1 178.63.145.230 aka ns4.opennic.glue ceasing OpenNIC operation immediately(no .bit / no recusion)

discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org

Subject: Discuss mailing list

List archive

Re: [opennic-discuss] !ATTENTION! FurNIC Sponsored T1 178.63.145.230 aka ns4.opennic.glue ceasing OpenNIC operation immediately(no .bit / no recusion)


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Jonah Aragon <jonaharagon AT gmail.com>
  • To: discuss <discuss AT lists.opennicproject.org>
  • Subject: Re: [opennic-discuss] !ATTENTION! FurNIC Sponsored T1 178.63.145.230 aka ns4.opennic.glue ceasing OpenNIC operation immediately(no .bit / no recusion)
  • Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 13:59:30 -0500

ISP's DNS servers are generally whitelisted internally (to their customer network) so they don't have to deal with stuff like that, with a few exceptions, ours on the other hand are publicly accessible to anyone.

The issue doesn't seem to be with Spamhaus necessarily here however, it seems to be with the hosting provider ns4 is using, because they'd rather block a paying customer than have an IP blacklisted by a spam organization (which may be a good trade-off for them, who knows, I have no idea how much is being paid for ns4's servers). For example if Spamhaus came after me I could easily just laugh and not pay them attention because my hosting providers aren't going to care, and I'm not going to care because being blacklisted generally doesn't come with many consequences outside of email deliverability. The provider for ns4 on the other hand was prepared to completely nullroute their network.

There's definitely an issue here with misunderstanding between us, Spamhaus, and our hosting providers, but it should be a fairly trivial task to move to a provider who won't be swayed so easily by random third party organizations.

That's how I see it at least.

Jonah

On May 18, 2017 1:50 PM, "Daniel Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com> wrote:
Are all ISPs doing this now for their official DNS servers, blocking resolution of allegedly malicious Web sites or being blacklisted as spammers? Or is it just "the man" coming after us "the little guys"?

--

-Dan Q

On Thu, 18 May 2017 09:16:00 -0500, Daniel Shirley <aditaa05 AT gmail.com> wrote:

> i Would like to help in anyway i can.
>
> I can sponsor the T1 server for FurNIC if it would help.
>
> if you need anything please let me know
>
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Stephan Jauernick <
> info AT stephan-jauernick.de> wrote:
>
> > Dear OpenNIC Community,
> >
> > Sadly we got served several Abuse Reports forwarded from Spamhaus via
> > our Provider declaring that we resolve a malicious .bit domain. As we
> > can't and won't censor this domain we send a reply to Spamhaus and our
> > hoster. They did not acknowledge our stance in regards of OpenNIC being
> > a open democratic and censorship free DNS Infrastructure. Instead our
> > provider replied and gave us what amounts to a 24 Hour deadline before
> > they consider nullrouting the IP Address and the connected servers.
> >



--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

Top of Page