nanog mailing list archives
RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police
From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer () mhsc com>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 09:42:54 -0800
From: Ben Browning [mailto:benb () oz net] Sent: Monday, November 20, 2000 9:17 AM
The point is this: 137-139 are used for NetBIOS and Samba, neither of which are secure (or even supported by their vendors, AFAIK) for use out on the Internet. I think we can all agree that anyone using them in that situation, shouldn't be.
No, we cannot all agree to that. I cannot condone anyone else applying their ideology, by force or default, on someone else, unless specifically requested. As a downstream customer, the backbone is nearly unreachable from a services perspective. If CERFNET started to do port-filtering then the only means I (I assume that everyone here has sufficient clue to find my upstream) have to change that is to either sue CERFNET or start looking for an ISP that has a different backbone provider. CERFNET tech support will not even talk to second or third level customers. In essence, it eliminates the secondary re-seller market from contention. You risk getting sued, not only from the downstream customer, but your own downstream as well. The ONLY one that should be even dreaming about doing something like this is the direct upstream to the leaf nodes, and then ONLY with permission. Otherwise, no ports should ever be filtered by any transit provider. By God, we PAY for open pipes and there are standard remedies when we don't get what we pay for.
Current thread:
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Christian Kuhtz (Nov 20)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Roeland Meyer (Nov 20)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Adrian Chadd (Nov 20)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Roeland Meyer (Nov 20)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 20)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Shawn McMahon (Nov 20)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Roeland Meyer (Nov 20)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Roeland Meyer (Nov 20)
- "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." JIM FLEMING (Nov 20)
- Re: "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." Bora Akyol (Nov 20)
- Re: "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." Joe Abley (Nov 21)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Jason Slagle (Nov 21)
- "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." JIM FLEMING (Nov 20)
(Thread continues...)