nanog mailing list archives
Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware)
From: "Scott Weeks" <surfer () mauigateway com>
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 10:36:51 -0800
--- pete () he iki fi wrote: From: Petri Helenius <pete () he iki fi> Geo. wrote:
I know this is kind of a crazy idea but how about making cleaning up all these infected machines the priority as a solution instead of defending your dns from your infected clients. They not only affect you, they affect the rest of us so why should we give you a solution to your problem when you don't appear to care about causing problems for the rest of us?
:: Has anyone figured out a remote but lawful way to repair :: zombie machines? Lawful in which country? scott
Current thread:
- Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware), (continued)
- Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware) Simon Waters (Dec 08)
- Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware) Matt Ghali (Dec 08)
- Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware) Luke C (Dec 11)
- Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware) Luke C (Dec 11)
- Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware) Simon Waters (Dec 11)
- Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware) Matt Ghali (Dec 11)
- Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware) Mark Andrews (Dec 11)
- Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware) Matt Ghali (Dec 08)
- Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware) Simon Waters (Dec 08)
- Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware) Jo Rhett (Dec 27)
- Re: DNS - connection limit (without any extra hardware) Randy Bush (Dec 27)
- Network security practices survey Sean Donelan (Dec 09)