[44764] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Hi
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (=?iso-8859-1?B?qLC6qVtRdWVlbiBWYW1)
Wed Dec 12 00:50:43 2001
Message-ID: <012001c182d0$71231ea0$247ba1ca@alphalink.com.au>
From: "=?iso-8859-1?B?qLC6qVtRdWVlbiBWYW1wXam6sKg=?=" <vampiress@vampiress-au.net>
To: "nanog" <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 16:47:08 +1100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>
> Guilty for clue-impairment is a lot different than guilty of intent to
> spread. As for clue-impairment, I think everyone here agrees that Cisco
> should have this well filtered. If this was your intended statement, then
> yes, agreed. It was the implication of malice that I think was
> inappropriate, especially in a public forum.
Well hang on a bit there.... shouldn't merit have this filtered as well?
Agreed the person who opened the said SCR should have had a clue, but what
about merit protecting its subscribers? At very least one would think they
would be geared up to thwart the spread of such viruses.
X-Virus-Scanned: by MailScan
