[60500] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Port blocking last resort in fight against virus
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Temkin, David)
Wed Aug 13 12:18:18 2003
From: "Temkin, David" <temkin@sig.com>
To: "'Matthew Kaufman'" <matthew@eeph.com>,
"'McBurnett, Jim'" <jmcburnett@msmgmt.com>, nanog@merit.edu
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 12:15:42 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
True, but at that time you didn't have illegitimate traffic on port 80,
either. Future engineering could be worked around this issue.
-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Kaufman [mailto:matthew@eeph.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 12:09 PM
To: 'McBurnett, Jim'; nanog@merit.edu
Subject: RE: Port blocking last resort in fight against virus
> From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On
> Behalf Of McBurnett, Jim
>... I really can not image
> legitimate traffic on 135..
My problem with this approach is that, in 1985, you could have said "I
really cannot imagine legitimate traffic on port 80".
(On the other hand, you could probably say that today and be mostly right)
Matthew Kaufman
matthew@eeph.com
