nanog mailing list archives
Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 12:19:09 -0400 (EDT)
On Sun, 21 Oct 2007, Gaurab Raj Upadhaya wrote:
It's not just mail. These days the mantra seems to be "only allow port 80 and 443 through, the users don't need anything else." specially in situations you cite (public wifi, hotel nets etc.). In these cases, i believe even ssh won't go through. Default settings in some devices don't help either.
Welcome to the read-only Internet. If you need anything else, SSL-VPN back to your personal colo <http://www.vix.com/personalcolo/>
Current thread:
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques, (continued)
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Al Iverson (Oct 22)
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 22)
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Dave Pooser (Oct 22)
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Sean Figgins (Oct 22)
- [admin] Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Alex Pilosov (Oct 22)
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Suresh Ramasubramanian (Oct 21)
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Al Iverson (Oct 22)
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Sean Donelan (Oct 21)
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Adrian Chadd (Oct 23)
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Owen DeLong (Oct 23)
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Jack Bates (Oct 23)
- Message not available
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Owen DeLong (Oct 23)
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Dave Pooser (Oct 23)
- RE: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques David Schwartz (Oct 23)
- Re: Misguided SPAM Filtering techniques Dave Pooser (Oct 23)