Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: SMURF amplifier block list
From: "Chris Liljenstolpe" <cds () wwsi com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 06:56:18 +0000


     I was just thinking the same thing.  In general, I hate (as I'm sure
everyone else here does as well) cutting connectivity, but this appears to
be the only way to fix the problem.  The RBL (or something architected like
it) would be a very clean way of doing it....


--On Sunday, 12 April, 1998, 00:54 -0400 "Jon Lewis"
<jlewis () inorganic5 fdt net> wrote: 

On Sat, 11 Apr 1998, Sean M. Doran wrote:

And consequently increases the liklihood that more networks
will refuse traffic to or from these networks, which in turn
increases the pressure on these sites to wonder what is happening
to their connectivity and how to repair it.   Which may just solve
the problem.

This is a monumental admission: I think Karl is doing the right thing.

Would the vix people have any interest in just adding "being a smurf amp"
to the possible causes for entry in the BGP version of RBL?  That way, it
would be harder for the smurf d00dz to get up to date lists. 

I suggested this sort of thing a while ago, but don't currently have time
to implement it.  The vix people already have everything in place.

 Jon Lewis <jlewis () fdt net>  |  http://noagent.com/?jl1 for cheap 
 Network Administrator       |  life insurance over the net.
 Florida Digital Turnpike    |  
______http://inorganic5.fdt.net/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key____

CChris Liljenstolpe   -   Principal Engineer   -    worldwide solutions,
Currently under contract to the US Antarctic Prog.,  McMurdo Stn. Antarctica
mailto:cds () wwsi com http://www.wwsi.com  TEL(303)-581-0800 FAX(303)-530-0191
worldwide solutions, Inc.  Ste 100, 4450 Arapahoe Ave, Boulder CO, 80303 USA

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]