nanog mailing list archives
Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt?
From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas () nexthop com>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:26:07 -0500
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 12:28:47PM -0800, Paul Vixie wrote:
Bad for whom? Only for the sender? Does this sender have rights which should supercede the property rights of recipients and of infrastructure owners? If so then who gets to decide whether mail is legitimate or not? The sender again? If so then why should anyone ever be allowed to filter out "spam", either as a recipient, or as an infrastructure owner?
As an infrastructure owner, the important thing is that if you're going to announce reachability, it should be real. If you blackhole stuff in the middle of a netblock and distribute it as an untainted netblock in your BGP, you're depriving people of clean routes. Other than that, exercise your policy to your heart's content. -- Jeff Haas NextHop Technologies
Current thread:
- Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt?, (continued)
- Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? JC Dill (Oct 29)
- RE: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? Mike Batchelor (Oct 30)
- Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? John Payne (Oct 30)
- Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? Ryan Tucker (Oct 30)
- RE: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? JC Dill (Oct 28)
- Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? Adam McKenna (Oct 28)
- Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 29)
- RE: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? Charles Sprickman (Oct 29)
- Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? Wojtek Zlobicki (Oct 29)
- RE: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? jlewis (Oct 29)
- Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? Jeffrey Haas (Oct 29)
- Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? Paul A Vixie (Oct 29)
- Re: Fwd: Re: Digital Island sponsors DoS attempt? Jeffrey Haas (Oct 29)