|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 19:08:28 -0600 (CST) From: "Edward S. Marshall" <emarshal@logic.net> To: Shawn McMahon <smcmahon@eiv.com> Cc: nanog@merit.edu In-Reply-To: <4.3.0.29.0.20000113194715.00a51d60@george.he.net> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0001131857470.10392-100000@labyrinth> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu On Thu, 13 Jan 2000, Shawn McMahon wrote: > If they can't test you, they rub two neurons together and test you from > another address. Ah. That scales wonderfully, and makes them the equivilent of roaming spammers. Great idea. I'm sure Alan and company will act on that right away. You honestly think moving the automated probes from network to network is a good idea? > Perhaps you should read their FAQ before asking questions about their > service. Actually, I'm extremely familiar with their service; I'm a long-time supporter of ORBS. Perhaps you should go back and read the NANOG archives for the multitude of times this subject has come up in the past. > The only way you can prevent them from having any means of testing you is: > > Close your relay. I wholeheartedly agree. What does this have to do with your original statement that ORBS has gone too far by manually listing address ranges which specifically block the relay probes? -- Edward S. Marshall <emarshal@logic.net> http://www.xnet.com/~emarshal/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [ Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas. ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |