![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Richard B. Johnson wrote: > On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > >>On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 02:11:59PM -0400, Richard B. Johnson wrote: >> > Well it seems that fire-walling the SPAM servers is *not* a good idea. > They are persistant, gang up, and will not give up until they are > able to deliver the mail! When I firewall them, my network traffic According to standards they will give up after 5 days or so. > ends up being continuous SYN floods as every spam-server in the > country tries to connect. It doesn't do any good to set `ipchains` to > REJECT instead of DENY. They just keep on banging on the door. > Have you considered teergrubing them instead? That ought to fix the bandwith problem. And it is not so fun for whoever has the spam server either - either disrupting some spammers operation or harassing some server admin into making his box un-abuseable. Helge Hafting - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:48 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||