nanog mailing list archives
RE: [Operational] Internet Police
From: "George Bonser" <gbonser () seven com>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 09:59:56 -0800
Not to mention the risk of lost business for customers that just can't be bothered to fix broken machines. Paul
That supposes that another ISP would accept their bot-infected machine. It would require some cooperation among the providers. And should some ISP get the reputation of being a bot-haven, then maybe their customers might notice connectivity issues.
Current thread:
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police, (continued)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Robert E. Seastrom (Dec 09)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Dobbins, Roland (Dec 09)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Bill Woodcock (Dec 09)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Lamar Owen (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police J. Oquendo (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police William McCall (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Jack Bates (Dec 10)
- RE: [Operational] Internet Police George Bonser (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Jack Bates (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Paul Graydon (Dec 10)
- RE: [Operational] Internet Police George Bonser (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Paul Graydon (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Jack Bates (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police JC Dill (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Michael Smith (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Lamar Owen (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Jack Bates (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Jack Bates (Dec 10)
- Re: [Operational] Internet Police Joel Jaeggli (Dec 10)