Wired mag article on spammers playing traceroute games with trojaned boxes

Thu Oct 9 16:35:27 UTC 2003

	I can kinda agree with this idea for the most part. In past ISP
environments I've worked in and had input in decisions we did redirect
SMTP traffic back to our mail servers or blocked out-right access to
mail servers outside our control but there were always some special
cases. Just as stopping residential broadband customers from hosting
servers. I know in my personal situation I do have servers hosted on my
residential ADSL connection, but this is known by the provider and I'm
also paying for a static subnet that they're hosted on. I think for the
general dynamically addressed broadband connections this might be a wise
idea, but for those that are paying for static IPs or even static
subnets those blocks should be left alone. Granted this would probably
include most cable modem and a fair amount of DSL customers.

	Regards,
	Jeremy T. Bouse

On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 12:19:37PM -0400, Vinny Abello wrote:
> Personally, I think preventing residential broadband customers from hosting 
> servers would limit a lot of that. I'm not saying that IS the solution. 
> Whether or not that's the right thing to do in all circumstances for each 
> ISP is a long standing debate that surfaces here from time to time. Same as 
> allowing people to host mail servers on cable modems or even allowing them 
> to access mail servers other than the ISP's.
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20031009/cd452374/attachment.sig>