I have been looking for a sub 5K router on the used market to support
around 30-50 megs peak traffic.
I have found the 7507/7513 but these things appear to have been
manufactured in 1995 !
Then there is the 7206 and the 7206 VXR - I guess the 7206 itself is
just as old as the 7507 and 7513 and
this may be deemed off topic - if so apologies in advance. however i respect many of
the opinions i see here so thought i would take a chance and ask.
we are a stub network, injesting about 30k emails daily. about a year ago we
implemented a spam filtering product. it works well. recently
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [2/7/2004 4:55 PM] :
this may be deemed off topic - if so apologies in advance. however i respect many of the opinions i see here so thought i would take a chance and ask.
we are a stub network, injesting about 30k emails daily. about a year ago we implemented a spam
Well, it seems to work relatively well when it comes to motor vehicles...
Oh, sure, there are still lots of morons driving unsafe poorly-maintained
vehicles around, but I'm sure there would be WAY way more if traffic laws
(and inspection requirements, etc, depending on your jurisdiction) went
On 7-feb-04, at 11:48, Alexander Hagen wrote:
I have been looking for a sub 5K router on the used market to support
around 30-50 megs peak traffic.
[...]
We are looking at a pure Ethernet environment - but with the desire to
support a lot of value added services - such as IPSEC, VoIP, traffic
Montara is between Pacifica and Half Moon Bay.
Everyone has a different perspective - but all valid. However I would
say if you are going to go Cisco - and you have no other BGP gear under
Smartnet - you might look at the 3725 maxed out. It is new and you will
get support and available for
Robin Lynn Frank wrote:
On Friday 06 February 2004 20:43, Adi Linden wrote:
There are valid reasons not to run antivirus software,
And they are?
With the exception of my BBS (still running) and until 2 weeks ago I
hadn't run any av software on my machines (now I run clamav via
There are quite a few sites (including the freebsd.org mailserver, and,
on a case by case basis, even AOL) that do refuse mail from IPs without
rDNS, but turning on a must have rDNS or you can't email us setting
will definitely result in a non trivial amount of false positives.
but, i
Sorry for the abuse of bandwidth but I've exhausted the standard
options.
I need a working mail alias that gets to a human postmaster at
Hotmail. Have tried postmaster, hostmaster, security and abuse. The only
response other than this alias doesn't work was from abuse, telling me
that the spam
Title: Message
This would essentially be impossible and not a good idea. Large
volumes of hosts/zombies involved in such attacks originate from residential
cable/dsl subscribers. This user baseprimarily uses dynamically
assigned IP space. Hence, the IP of tonight's attacker could be the IP
[ private email not quoted ]
this is what i call shooting in the dark. what are
OBJECTIVE METRICS? for example, can operators measure and
publish alpha and beta error rates on a selection of sites
of different flavors so we can decide when they are low
enough for our flavor of site to enable
It need be neither momentous nor monumental -
Just say it's 0.0.0.0 / 0 with some occasional exceptions.
Regards
Marshall Eubanks
On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 11:56:28 -0500
Wayne Gustavus (nanog) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This would essentially be impossible and not a good idea. Large volumes of
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 12:03:22 GMT, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gu=F0bj=F6rn_Hreinsson?= [EMAIL
PROTECTED] said:
Maybe we should first have laws that prohibit making and selling computers
without firewalls? In this context I should be fine making cars without
This is going in the Very Wrong Direction.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
we are a stub network, injesting about 30k emails daily. about a year
ago we implemented a spam filtering product. it works well. recently we
turned on the knob to enable it to do reverse lookups. only the mild
version, a reverse is made on the ptr rr for the ip
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wouldn't recommend trying to expand it to prohibit making and selling
computers that are insecure, since no computer is 100% secure, and there's
no objective secure enough standard - closest you will get there is
probably Dell's offer to ship machines pre-hardened to
I think the tipping point went by a while ago, and that anyone
who wants their e-mail to be accepted will make sure their mail
relay has a PTR and that that this PTR holds the same name used
in the SMTP HELO command.
so you think it is fine if i require rdns for the ietf and other
mailing
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 20:27:11 +0200, Petri Helenius said:
It would help if systems would only execute code that is signed
properly. This would make malware traceable. However the current way of
getting your code signed is in many cases too costly for the casual open
source developer so
On Sat, 7 Feb 2004, Randy Bush wrote:
I think the tipping point went by a while ago, and that anyone
who wants their e-mail to be accepted will make sure their mail
relay has a PTR and that that this PTR holds the same name used
in the SMTP HELO command.
so you think it is fine if i
On Feb 7, 2004, at 3:34 PM, Scott Call wrote:
My question is who is stupid enough to actually respond to an email
written in 'leet speak like this.
I dunno what in the blue hell it's called but it sure as hell isn't
l337 speak. It's a cross between boken engrish and kindergarten
spelling.
On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 08:38:27AM -0600, Claydon, Tom wrote:
Question for the list:
Cisco introduced a command in 12.3T to limit DHCP leases on ATM unnumbered
interfaces (ip dhcp limit lease per interface). This feature works fine on
our 7206VXR, but my problem is that this is a global
I've run all my mailers with aggressive PTR checks for about a year, and
while some of my guests aren't getting all the e-mail that's sent to them,
it's had no impact on me other than that periodically I have to tell some
remote postmaster that their PTR's are missing or that they don't match
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 12:34:05 PST, Scott Call [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
My question is who is stupid enough to actually respond to an email
written in 'leet speak like this.
C.M.Kornbluth wrote The Marching Morons in 1951. A half century of
hindsight has proven the concept correct
On Sun, 8 Feb 2004, Paul Vixie wrote:
... What do you suggest otherwise-responsible operators like me do,
when after begging SBC for two years, my reverse DNS still isn't
delegated correctly?
or send SBC a copy of RFC 2317 every hour via a crontab. might not be
very effective but it
Randy Bush wrote:
this is what i call shooting in the dark. what are
OBJECTIVE METRICS? for example, can operators measure and
publish alpha and beta error rates on a selection of sites
of different flavors so we can decide when they are low
enough for our flavor of site to enable rdns filters?
-Original Message-
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2004 9:58 PM
To: Wayne Gustavus (nanog)
Cc: 'Drew Weaver'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Monumentous task of making a list of all DDoS Zombies.
snip
1. It is arguable
Wayne Gustavus (nanog) wrote:
http://cbl.abuseat.org
Interesting approach. It would be conceivable that if this resource was
Widely used, miscreants could use this service to DDoS there victims without
an army of zombies :-) I still submit that it is more advisable to address
the root of the
26 matches
Mail list logo
