[122801] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Spamhaus...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tomas L. Byrnes)
Mon Feb 22 00:01:31 2010
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 21:00:14 -0800
In-Reply-To: <3c3e3fca1002211001r3a0705f6l13e831e51dad85fa@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Tomas L. Byrnes" <tomb@byrneit.net>
To: "William Herrin" <bill@herrin.us>,
"Rich Kulawiec" <rsk@gsp.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Herrin [mailto:bill@herrin.us]
> Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 10:02 AM
> To: Rich Kulawiec
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Spamhaus...
>=20
> On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org> wrote:
> > Hint: nothing stops the spammers from pointing the MX records for
> their
> > throwaway domains at somebody else's mail servers. =A0Among other
> things.
> > MANY other things, unfortunately.
>=20
> Rich,
>=20
> Clearly I shouldn't respond to any packets at all. After all, a bad
> actor can originate packets with a forged source address and I
> wouldn't want to abuse your network with unwanted echo-replies,
> syn-acks and rejs.
>=20
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
[Tomas L. Byrnes]=20
Maybe he should avoid any traffic on any non Point to Point only link =
with no repeaters, as there's always the possibility of a beaconing =
station or someone with SQE turned on.
Reductio ad absurdam; which, btw, is never a valid argument for, or =
against.
P.S. I once wrote code to change line idle code on Multi-drop X.25 from =
7E to FF, because AT&T ignored DTR and had all their MJUs run wide open, =
thereby destroying a NRZI multidrop 56kbps digital circuit, so the above =
scenario is not fictitious. Needless to say, pulling the plug was not an =
option.
