Re: mail to/from att.com

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>]

In message <01L25TX4HZAQ00Q4RU@mauve.mrochek.com>, ned.freed@mrochek.com writes
:
>> as att.com no longer accepts email from the internet, att.com
>> mailing list subscribers will not receive email from the lists
>> on psg.com/ops.ietf.org/...  i propose to
>
>>   o bounce mail to att.com with a message that they are no longer
>>     on the internet
>
>>   o refuse mail from att.com as they are no longer able to accept
>>     bounces, ...
>
>> do folk have issues with this?
>
>This is more or less what I plan to do myself after I get the first bounce 
>from an att.com address. Haven't seen one yet, and I've heard rumors that
>the policy is being reconsidered.

It's not a rumor, it's fact -- they rethought that *very* quickly.  The 
issue was a massive spam overload that completely swamped the gateways.
Mail to att.com (but not research.att.com -- we have our own gateways) 
is still very slow until the backlog clears.

Here's the official statement that I was permitted to post to NANOG.
No, I didn't write it, and no, they didn't take my advice on what it 
should and shouldn't say.



----
              AT&T STATEMENT - CURRENT SPAM ATTACK - 10/22/03

AT&T and a number of other large companies have seen a marked
increase in the amount of incoming SPAM in recent days. A team of
experts that includes members from AT&T Labs, Network Services,
and Corporate Security has implemented a number of procedures to
remediate this situation and minimize its impact on those trying
to send e-mail to "att.com" addresses.

As of this morning - Wednesday, October 22nd - the level of incoming
e-mail messages is returning to normal and the situation appears
to be well in hand. Although all AT&T e-mail servers are fully
operational at this time, some incoming messages are experiencing
intermittent delays as SPAM filtering continues at all network
gateways.

Customers who received e-mail bulletins from AT&T Monday and Tuesday
requesting specific information are advised to disregard those
messages.  They were inadvertently sent out in error and we apologize
for any confusion or inconvenience they may have caused.

Network reliability is one of our top priorities at AT&T, so for
obvious reasons we will not be providing more detailed information
regarding the specific security procedures implemented to curb this
SPAM attack. We have no intention of helping those who generate
this type of computer and Internet mischief.


		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb