[43755] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (James Thomason)
Thu Oct 25 22:58:04 2001
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 19:50:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: James Thomason <james@divide.org>
To: JC Dill <nanog@vo.cnchost.com>
Cc: nanog <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20011025190850.03bf2960@127.0.0.1>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0110251935160.25013-100000@www1>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, JC Dill wrote:
> Above.net's blocking of ORBS led to fewer and fewer networks using ORBS and
> IMHO it contributed to the weakness that allowed the lawsuit to happen and
> thrive. If ORBS had been a stronger service with more users, they might
> have done things differently before or during the lawsuit.
>
> What happens to Digital Island if networks (especially large networks)
> start blocking them because they won't stop repeatedly scanning when
> asked? Can it do them *any* good?
>
I would assume they might develop a better probing methodology that is
harder to detect or block.
Is it really productive to deem the packets of others "dirty" when you
willingly participate in a public-access medium? Are the probes creating
more overhead than an ACL?
Or is someone just pissed because they have their pager linked to
tail -f ids.log?
> jc
>
>
