[64278] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IAB concerns against permanent deployment of edge-based filtering
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Sat Oct 18 15:38:21 2003
To: bmanning@karoshi.com
Cc: eric@roxanne.org (Eric Gauthier), nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 18 Oct 2003 11:14:42 PDT."
<200310181814.h9IIEg814892@karoshi.com>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 15:36:52 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--==_Exmh_-1825136788P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 11:14:42 PDT, bmanning@karoshi.com said:
> > > There is a real danger that long-term continued blocking will lead
> > > to "everything on one port"
>
> fair amount of handwaving there.
Question: Why was RFC3093 published? (Think(*) for a bit here...)
About a month later, there was a *major* flame-fest on the IETF list due to
this message:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg11918.html
Yes, the basic reason for this proposal was because many firewalls will pass HTTP
but not BEEP.
What major P2P applications have included a "run over port 80" option to let
themselves through firewalls?
It's not just handwaving.
(*) Remember - satire isn't funny if it isn't about something recognizable...
--==_Exmh_-1825136788P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQE/kZZUcC3lWbTT17ARAje8AKDQCDcHZnyIQ62yHednJozT5t0MXACgokPH
iDEpFwI/O2MpY2cJsFwRnaU=
=kRAc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_-1825136788P--
