Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: cloudmark?
From: Martin Hotze <m.hotze () hotze com>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 17:16:55 +0000

Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 10:31:08 -0400
From: Chris Conn <cconn () b2b2c ca>
To: nanog () nanog org
Subject: Re: cloudmark?
Message-ID: <5164262C.3070806 () b2b2c ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

On 2013-04-09 10:27, Chris Conn wrote:

(...)
Your experience does not mirror mine at all.  I have less than 30

good for you. :-)

minutes of wait time for any support case, and they are few and far
between.  Reliability is high and FP rate is low.   I have no idea what
your reference to lawyers pertains to, however the only issue we have
ever had was for them to take our money when we renewed for the
umpteenth time.

We are not a paying cloudmark customer.
We just want to get one of our IPv4 address off of their list.

 #m



  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
  • cloudmark? Martin Hotze (Apr 09)
    • <Possible follow-ups>
    • Re: cloudmark? Chris Conn (Apr 09)
    • Re: cloudmark? Martin Hotze (Apr 09)
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]