[69638] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Lazy network operators
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rob Nelson)
Sat Apr 17 11:27:13 2004
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 11:26:13 -0400
To: John Curran <jcurran@istaff.org>,
"Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>
From: Rob Nelson <ronelson@vt.edu>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <p06020409bca2403fda31@[192.168.1.101]>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>Steve, you're authorized if you say you are and agree to accept
>responsibility.
>Most corporations would readily provide the addresses of their mail servers;
>anyone on DSL or cable connection could do the same. But by changing the
>default behavior to block port 25 until requested, you could readily
>address the
>spam problem. It would take some work on the part of operator community
>(hence the subject), and doesn't fit in the world wide commune perspective
>of networking, but it would make the Internet far more useful for everyone.
(I realize I'm a few days late on this, been travelling all week)
What about that small business with a remote site on a cable modem? All
they want is their local server to talk to the one upstream, and they'd
rather pay, say, Time Warner $50 a month on a dynamic instead of $200 for a
single static IP. Can't really blame them, can you? Is this
authorization-filter-scheme going to account for servers on dynamic IP?
Rob Nelson
ronelson@vt.edu
