Re: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Things learned thus far

[Marc Perkel <marc@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Mike O'Connor wrote:
> Let me try my hand at restating Eric's post in an imaginary "sales 
> memo" format.
> Dear Proposers of Solutions (aka Team Fast Flux),
>
> You haven't made the sale yet.  Here are the objections you're hearing 
> from prospective customers and partners;
> - Some remain unconvinced that Fast Flux a problem (or a subset of a 
> problem) that needs to be solved at all (providers of data take note, 
> stronger facts would be useful here)
I think fast flux is one step in a greater problem connected to spam and 
isn't a stand alone problem. So I assume that if we are going to solve 
anything it's in the context of the bigger picture as to how fast flux 
is used (illegally) as part of a spam driven fraud campaign. I'm leaning 
towards that if you eliminate the spam you eliminate the fast flux 
(except for getting around Chinese firewalls which is legitimate). FF 
can help detect the spam and the spam can help detect the FF.
But - I have to agree that FF isn't an issue by itself.