Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 5 Sep 2000 01:42:54 -0400 (EDT) | From | Gregory Maxwell <> | Subject | [OFFTOPIC] Re: What the Heck? [Fwd: Returned mail: User unknown] |
| |
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Ricky Beam wrote:
[snip] > As an aside, they also have/had agressive transparent web proxying in > the network... everything on port 80 coming and going is/was cached. > EVERYTHING.
Ugh. If bandwidth is a problem, charge them by the Gb and let them save money by reducing their usage via the W3 cache.
> One could say this about SPAM in general. SMTP was designed as on open > transport. Now we have to go around and board up the windows so no one > can see inside.
SMTP wasn't designed to expect people to 'steal' another persons machine and bandwidth as a third-party exploder.
> They aren't rewriting your packects; they just simply force you to connect > to _their_ mail servers for incoming and outgoing mail.
Alan was suggesting that providers use transproxy to filter mail.
> >As far as broadband service goes, just give the damn users fixed IPs and > >let the opt-in blacklists handle them. > > ARIN (and other registries) don't like "static IP" ISPs.
Thats not true. I'm quite familiar with what ARIN wants, and I've got more then a few IP addresses under my belt (GFM1-ARIN). They basically want you to have a single address per possible simultaneous system. For broadband users, that would mean every user. For dialup with a typical 8:1 user:modem ratio, it's a little different.
> Besides, the > provider wants to be able to charge a s***load for a static address even > when their DHCP hardware already is configured to prefer reassigning the > same address -- people have been known to have the same address for months > even after prolonged down time.
Sounds like a problem in their business model.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |