[119738] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Finding asymmetric path
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Sat Nov 28 22:03:44 2009
In-Reply-To: <3c3e3fca0911281428x668ced3bk5dfd5d63c7dfca9d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 08:32:31 +0530
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com>
To: William Herrin <herrin-nanog@dirtside.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Yes - term the account would be my recommendation
And if you filter port 25 traffic do it both ways
Read these old nanog threads ..
http://www.irbs.net/internet/nanog/0408/0465.html and
http://www.mail-archive.com/nanog@merit.edu/msg28863.html
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 3:58 AM, William Herrin
<herrin-nanog@dirtside.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 2:14 PM, ML <ml@kenweb.org> wrote:
>> Brielle is correct. =C2=A0The customer in question is spamming networks =
and we
>> are having trouble filtering them because another provider allows them t=
o
>> source traffic however they please.
>
> What trouble? SMTP requires two-way traffic with a static port number
> that nothing else uses. If for some reason you don't want to simply
> terminate their account altogether, block packets outbound to your
> customer sourced from TCP port 25 but not from your SMTP smarthosts.
>
> Seriously though, if you can prove they're spamming (regardless of
> whether the packets pass through your network) save yourself some
> grief and just terminate the account.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>
>
> --
> William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com =C2=A0bill@herrin.=
us
> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
>
>
--=20
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
