nanog mailing list archives

Re: Outgoing SMTP Servers


From: Henry Yen <henry () AegisInfoSys com>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 13:57:02 -0400

On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 19:24:23PM -0600, Owen DeLong wrote:
Firewalls are perfectly valid and I have no general objection to
filtering packets based on the policy set by a site. What I object to is
having someone I pay to move my packets tell me that they won't move
some of those packets because they feel it is some form of best practice
to eliminate my perfectly valid packets in order to prevent someone else
from committing some form of abuse on the same protocol.

I object even more strenuously to someone who redirects my packets for
their intended destination to some man in the middle attack destination
of their choosing.

Would it be useful to slice this analysis into component parts, e.g.
"Residential" (dynamic), "small" (single/handful, e.g. small business,
colo, hosted web, VPS), and large (/24 and up), as what is defined as
"moving packets" may be viewed significantly differently?

For instance, what Residential customers are paying for seems to not
necessarily be (strictly speaking) "just moving all of your packets",
at least according to residential ToS' that I've read lately.

-- 
Henry Yen                                       Aegis Information Systems, Inc.
Senior Systems Programmer                       Hicksville, New York


Current thread: