> Making arguments based upon extreme cases, assumptions, or potential-for-collateral-damage is not scientific. "I know one that even [...]" Anecdotal evidence isn't scientific.
>From the perspective of your previous sentences that's kinda humorous. "To avoid unnecessary costs incurred from disruption of service, excessive traffic, annoyances using up *my* time, and countless other reasonable rationale from *my* point of view." Because sure, a few (hypothetical RIPE probe) connections are exactly that, zero exaggeration, right? In the end such fail2ban-fueled (or similar) behaviour I initially addressed, is exactly a non-scientific extreme-case assumption-based approach. There are better and even more standard ways. Crutch solutions out in the wild shouldn't be a showstopper for measuring the ecosystem. (That is already quite neglected) > What _objective_ risk/benefit analysis are you basing your opinions upon? And you? What's the implication here about systems being as trigger-happy as previously described? Because sure, at some point rate limits make total sense, but certainly not at the point where it would ban any potential RIPE probes. > Are you a systems administrator? Let's not get into such measuring contests, even if it is the RIPE Atlas mailing list. On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 11:42 PM Paul Theodoropoulos via ripe-atlas < ripe-atlas@ripe.net> wrote: > On 9/20/2022 10:45 AM, Avamander wrote: > > Great to hear it works for you, but the potential unfortunate collateral > from such a blanket action is not really RIPE Atlas' problem. There are > more fine-grained methods against bruteforce attempts and open relay > probes, than triggering on a few connections. > > What _objective_ risk/benefit analysis are you basing your opinions upon? > Are you a systems administrator? My responsibility is to avoid unnecessary > costs incurred from disruption of service, excessive traffic, annoyances > using up *my* time, and countless other reasonable rationale from *my* > point of view. > > You suggest that it is "not really RIPE Atlas' problem". That's very true. > And it is not really my problem if I bounce yoinky, pointless probes of my > server, and ruthlessly block them from contacting my server ever again. My > server, my choice, my wallet, nobody's business but my own. > > Some webmasters ban IP's for simply visiting a domain, I know one that > even dispatches an email to your ISP's abuse@ address upon visit. Should > RIPE Atlas probes then not probe any HTTP servers? The answer is obviously > no, they shouldn't care. > > Making arguments based upon extreme cases, assumptions, or > potential-for-collateral-damage is not scientific. "I know one that even > [...]" Anecdotal evidence isn't scientific. > > Note, I run a probe myself. I don't block any RIPE Atlas traffic on my > separate servers hosted on AWS, Oracle, and GCE. > > -- > Paul Theodoropoulos > anastrophe.com <https://www.anastrophe.com> > -- > ripe-atlas mailing list > ripe-atlas@ripe.net > https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-atlas >
-- ripe-atlas mailing list ripe-atlas@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ripe-atlas
