Re: Suggestions please: names for function cachability

Martin Renters <martin@datafax.com> writes:
> It is also pretty unreasonable to think that any company is
> going to switch providers because of one blacklist or somehow complain
> to their ISP about the spammers the ISP is hosting without any more
> detail than:

> 	"Blacklist X says you provide spam support and/or have too many
> 	 spammers on your network.  Please remove them so I can send
> 	 my email."

FWIW, all the blacklists I use (and 510sg is only the first line of
defense ;-)) have documentation available about the reasons for listing
IP blocks.  F'r instance, looking up Thomas' IP I get:

  xo.com.spam-support.blackholes.five-ten-sg.com.  23h32m50s IN TXT  "added 2002-01-05; spam support - dns server at 64.1.121.57 supporting http://www.poxteam2001.com"
  xo.com.spam-support.blackholes.five-ten-sg.com.  23h32m50s IN TXT  "added 2002-01-07; spam support - dns server at 64.1.121.57 supporting http://compower.numberop.com"
  xo.com.spam-support.blackholes.five-ten-sg.com.  23h32m50s IN TXT  "added 2002-03-07; spam support - hosting http://207.88.179.193 - terminated"
  xo.com.spam-support.blackholes.five-ten-sg.com.  23h32m50s IN TXT  "added 2002-03-10; spam support - hosting http://thecottagemonitor.com"
  xo.com.spam-support.blackholes.five-ten-sg.com.  23h32m50s IN TXT  "added 2002-03-13; spam support - hosting http://shortcuts2learning.com"
  xo.com.spam-support.blackholes.five-ten-sg.com.  23h32m50s IN TXT  "added 2002-03-24; spam support - hosting http://209.164.32.75/consumer_first_funding"

But this is getting pretty far off-topic for the PG lists.

			regards, tom lane