- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

luser of the day award!
by owen＠dixon.DeLong.SJ.CA.US 20 Nov '98

20 Nov '98

MAPS is good. Paul is to be commended for his efforts against SPAM. Should Alan actually file suit against Paul, I, for one, will contribute whatever I can to his defense, including time as well as money. I would hope that by now there are at least a few internet-savvy lawyers out there who might even take Pauls case on a pro-bono basis. BBS PRESS has no right to expect connectivity from anyone using the MAPS list, unless they are paying that company for connectivity. The internet works because people are willing to exchange traffic on a good-neighbor basis. Suing the guy two blocks away because he put a gate up to prevent you from walking through his front yard makes very little sense. Owen

1 0

RE: Lawsuit threat against RBL users
by Bob Allisat 20 Nov '98

20 Nov '98

"Brian" writes: > You are misguided. The constitution is "*Congress* shall make no > law....." not "<insert ISP name> shall make no law........" > > Things like freedom of speech, are only really an issue for the > Govt. When it comes to the private sector, we can do what we want. > If you are a private business, like an ISP, and don't want people > to see porn, you can filter porn, and tell people that you feel no > one should see it, and if they don't like it they will go > elsewhere. > > The checks and balances on that law, are the Freedom of > Enterprise, which protects the people. We have inalienable rights that extend beyond these rights to capitalize. These rights extend onto private property, into virtual networks, beyond fire- walls (if we are behind them) and to the heart of Vixie's unconscionable activities. The guy is setting the stage for a cyber-gulag where the unacceptables are simply "Black Holed" into non-existance. First for allegedly sending mail to too many people. Next for whatever silly other offense these despots in training dream up. Slippery. Slope. Bob Allisat Free Community Network _ bob(a)fcn.net . http://fcn.net http://fcn.net/allisat _ http://fcn.net/draft

1 0

Re: Digital Bill of Rights
by Bob Allisat 20 Nov '98

20 Nov '98

Chris Cappuccio writes: > Bob, I see this in your digital bill of rights: > > The right to protection, should we so choose, from mail bombing, > automatic mailers, large, unrequested file or data transfers and > similar harassments. > > How does the RBL violate this? I agree with most judgments made > by the RBL team. I subscribe. End of story... If someone can't > send me junk mail, I still feel pretty free. If someone tries to > send legitimate mail and it fails, best of luck, hotmail exists It violates this because it is, for the most part, involuntary. Furthermore it is a violation of certain fundamental principles of freedom of association and communications besides being a kind of repulsive and rather juvenille vigilante activity in response to the rather messy liberties of a democracy. I *do* have the right to send flyers in an election to my constituents. I *do* have the right to mail announcments to my neighbours. *No-one* have the right to interfere with these lawful activities in a civil society. You are all - Vixie foremost - degrading into envelope steaming, mail trashing creeps. hardly the society I want to see for the digital age. Bob Allisat Free Community Network _ bob(a)fcn.net . http://fcn.net http://fcn.net/allisat _ http://fcn.net/draft

1 0

Re: Black Hole Vixie/RBL
by John M. Brown 20 Nov '98

20 Nov '98

Bob, let me explain a couple of things to you that you seem to not grasp! 1. As the owner of an ISP, the equipment is mine, the network connections are mine, and the right of data to pass through that equipment is mine to control. Its called private property. 2. As a business I have the authority to tell my employee's what they can and can't do AT WORK. For example, I can say that we do not allow the reading of Playboy magazines on company time or property. This is perfectly legal. Yes I am censoring my employee from reading a publication. 3. If the USG was telling us internet providers to block or filter email that contained the word BOBO, then that would (or could) be considered a violation of certain freedoms. The RBL is not a government agency. Read the FAQ 4. The MAPS RBL project is an OPT-IN program. Mail server operators that wish to make use of those services do so of their own free will. 5. How they communicate that to their users (customers) is completely a private matter between them and their users (customers). 6. We tell all of our customers that we subscribe to the MAPS RBL project and as such mail from certain sites may be blocked. Our customers *love* this feature and it is part of the reason the select us as a provider. In closing Mr. Allisat, your statements that the MAPS RBL project is intercepting private Email and is manipulating the free flow of email is false. Though is sounds true to those that lack clue, it is false. The statement that a "technician" is making the decision is also patently false. If you took the time to properly research the FAQ's, the site, etc. you would know that an officer of the company must sign a document in order to use the service, that is to receive a feed. In addition for those that are passively using the service (via DNS lookups) I am quite sure they have the approval of management. If they don't and management doesn't support the choice, then it would be reversed. What we are protecting, and what is our right to protect, is theft of service. jmbrown(a)ihighway.net Copyright 1998 by John M. Brown All rights reserved. This message may only be referenced or duplicated in its entirety. Sub parts are a violation of this limited use statement. At 01:55 AM 2/7/36 -0500, you wrote: > >Derek writes: >> There are plenty of people, who are HAPPY to have Paul's RBL (I >> recently subscribed last night finally, thank you Paul!) around to >> lighten the workloads of our servers, and to lessen the mailspools >> of our customers. > > The simple point is you or any > other technician has no ability > or right to imagine themselves > representing or in any way inter- > fering with their customers mail. > You are acting as if you have any > right to intercept any private > e-mail. You have no such right. > In manipulating the free flow > of electronic mail you are > infringing with fundamentaly > human rigts and freedoms. > > Bob Allisat > > Free Community Network _ bob(a)fcn.net . http://fcn.net > http://fcn.net/allisat _ http://fcn.net/draft >

1 0

Cisco 7500, VIP2-40, PA-TX and PA-OC3
by Rubens Kuhl Jr. 20 Nov '98

20 Nov '98

Have anyone here pushed these configurations (Cisco 7500, VIP2-40 and PA-ATM-OC3 or PA-TX) into full line-speed (155 Mbps ATM, 100 Mbps Fast Ethernet) steady-state traffic? I was wondering if, even following the one PA per VIP guideline, these configurations will achieve a operational state or incur in packet loss. Traffic pattern is supposed to be same packets/s ratio on both sides, 100% bits/s ratio on one way, smaller packets on the other direction. Rubens Kuhl Jr.

1 0

Re: Black Hole Vixie/RBL (fwd)
by Bradley J. Passwaters 20 Nov '98

20 Nov '98

On Thu, 7 Feb 2036, Bob Allisat wrote: > The simple point is you or any > other technician has no ability > or right to imagine themselves > representing or in any way inter- > fering with their customers mail. That depends on the situation. If I own a toy company with an Internet connection and I don't want certain kinds of email to be sent or received I am within my rights to stop it. If I as joe user want to use a program to refuse/blackhole certain email I am within my rights. If I as Joe User want to use an ISP/other service to blackhole mail for me that is certainly my right. If you provide end user accounts/service (IE AOL,@HOME etc) I think if you define the terms of service up front to indicate that you reject certain types of traffic than there is not a problem. Users who sign up for that service can make their own decisions about what they want. > You are acting as if you have any > right to intercept any private > e-mail. You have no such right. > In manipulating the free flow > of electronic mail you are > infringing with fundamentaly > human rigts and freedoms. Actually to my mind its alot more like RBL is a boycott. Just as PETA or Americans against Nuclear Power or the NRA tell their membership how to bring pressure to bear via elections or refusing to buy certain products the RBL provides a list of sites/companies with which others who agree with RBL's stated objectives agree not to speak. I have no problem if companies or individuals or even communities (IE end users account providers) decide to undertake this action. There is an issue about wether bitpipe providers would be held to some kind of common carrier status if that is the case than certainly they would have to pass the traffic. If not its their equipment and they can do with it as they please. It should be noted that if the Internet continues to be an important part of our lives for communicating and for finding and purchasing goods and services I would expect to see other "alliances" with their own list of places/people that they don't want to see. For good or ill there will be information filtering technology in use. bjp(a)eng.umd.edu | Disclaimer: Can you be sure I even uunet!eng.umd.edu!istari | exist: Let alone represent anyone Brad Passwaters (Network Ronin) | or anything. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here we are. Born to be kings. We're the princes of the universe. Here we belong, fighting to survive in a war with the darkest power. Network Manager's Theme Song (QUEEN)

1 0

The NANOG email list
by Craig Labovitz 20 Nov '98

20 Nov '98

Given the recent volume of email regarding spam, domain names, usenet, and other topics, this is just a reminder that the NANOG mail list is for discussion of ISP engineering and operational topics. Posts of a political or legal nature are more appropriate for other lists,including: inet-access-request(a)earth.com com-priv(a)lists.psi.com domain-policy(a)internic.net SPAM-L (LISTSERV(a)PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM) Please see the NANOG email list AUP for more information: http://www.nanog.org/aup.html The NANOG email list now averages more than 1200 messages a month (more than double the monthly volume in 1996). At this volume of email exchange, rational discussion of engineering/ISP operational topics becomes untenable. Please help us maintain the quality and content of the NANOG email discussions. Questions or suggestions about the NANOG email list, and NANOG conferences should be sent to nanog-support(a)merit.edu. Thanks. - Craig & The Merit NANOG staff ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- Craig Labovitz labovit(a)merit.edu Merit Network, Inc. http://www.merit.edu/~labovit 4251 Plymouth Road, Suite C. (734) 764-0252 (office) Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2785 (734) 647-3185 (fax)

1 0

RE: Lawsuit threat against RBL users
by Sheryl Chapin 20 Nov '98

20 Nov '98

At 09:46 AM 11/19/98 -0500, you wrote: >That's a pretty shortsighted view, Sheryl. I suspect you haven't been on >the receiving end of some idtiot buying a leased line/virtual web presence >from you and then spamming from an AOL/PSI/earhlink/yadda yadda account. It >isn't pleasant. Folks aren't stupid. They ignore the fact that the tool >used to spam was a throwaway account and go right for the jugular (you). >It's better to have a zero tolerance policy and not have to deal with the >silliness in the first place. > You are correct, we have been lucky so far and this has not been an issue. If it becomes an issue, we may have to make changes to our AUP. However, what I don't like is the idea that we might have to make that change not based on what we think is acceptable use, but based on what some self appointed group has decided it should be. The consequences of not going along being that we get blackholed. Sheryl Chapin Senior Network Engineer CommTel Internet 207.377.3508 Winthrop, Maine schapin(a)ctel.net

3 2

Re: Lawsuit threat against RBL users
by brandon＠rd.bbc.co.uk 20 Nov '98

20 Nov '98

> >It seems to me, both from his allegations and from the > >phraseology of the "Best Practices for Being Permanently Added to the > >RBL", that web hosting services are being treated unfairly in the > >following circumstance: > > > >Company S(pam) has a web site, hosted on the servers of > >web-presence-provider Company P(rovider). ... > That's right. It stops the practice of using a sacrificial account, from > AOL or netcom, to spam for a web-site that is otherwise protected. Does it > make a difference that they didn't spam from their own ISP? Some people don't know where to draw the line though, is it just the ISP that hosts the site or all sites linked to that site and so on until there isn't a net? This isn't hypothetical as we've been in that position, a spammers site had a link to ours (and attached a copy of that page to a spam) so one spamee decided we must be spammers too and filtered us. As an innocent 3rd party who has no control over who links to our site (or mentions it in spam) it becomes a simple DOS (lets make a site that links to the top 100 web sites and make up a spam) brandon

2 1

Re: Oh no... someone had a bright idea!
by John Fraizer 19 Nov '98

19 Nov '98

We can send PMS after them. Oh, I guess I should elaborate. PMS = Pissed-off Marine Snipers. Nothing will ruin your day like being denied the squeeze when you have high confidence on a certain head-of-state over in camel-land. At 11:17 PM 11/18/98 -0800, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote: >At 09:37 PM 11/18/98 -0500, Robert Boyle wrote: >>This was forwarded to me by a friend. I was interested in exactly what they >>meant. This is pretty bad. I think these people don't understand that this >>affects US more than it affects the people who they are targeting. I >>suppose this is a strong case for transparent caching. Any thoughts? > >Yeah, they need to be nuked for propogating DoS attacks. This kind of stuff >is definitely against AUP and TOS around here. Has someone contacted their >provider? I would in a heartbeat, but whois isn't working at the moment. > > > >>---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 19:57:32 -0500 >>Subject: EDT Virtual Sit In >> >>November 18th 1998 Protest, ELECTRONIC DISTURBANCE THEATER >> >>EVERYWHERE: ELECTRONIC DISTURBANCE THEATER, Emergency Bulletin: Clinton: >> >>Do Not Bomb Iraq! - Join Ongoing Virtual Sit-In On White House Web Site >>Now, - The Electronic Disturbance Theater, opposes U.S. plans to bomb Iraq >>and urges like-minded people to join an emergency FloodNet action to send a >>message of peace to world leaders. EDT encourages people who oppose a U.S. >>military strike against Iraq to participate in an ongoing virtual sit-in on >>the web site of the White House by clicking on >>http://www.thing.net/~rdom/zapsPublic/ddkfoyer.htm and following the >>instructions and leaving your browser on. >> >> >> >>Garden Networks - Quality Internet Nationwide >>Access, Co-location, Development & Consulting >>http://www.garden.net (973)300-9211 Ext.103 >>It's not Area 51 I'm worried about... >>...it's Areas 1 through 50. >> > >___________________________________________________ >Roeland M.J. Meyer, ISOC (InterNIC RM993) >e-mail: <mailto:rmeyer@mhsc.com>rmeyer(a)mhsc.com >Internet phone: hawk.mhsc.com >Personal web pages: <http://www.mhsc.com/~rmeyer>www.mhsc.com/~rmeyer >Company web-site: <http://www.mhsc.com/>www.mhsc.com/ >___________________________________________ > Who is John Galt? > "Atlas Shrugged" - Ayn Rand > > ------- John Fraizer | __ _ The System Administrator | / / (_)__ __ ____ __ | The choice mailto:John.Fraizer@EnterZone.Net | / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / | of a GNU http://www.EnterZone.Net/ | /____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ | Generation A 486 is a terrible thing to waste...

2 1