but wait... you have refined the question. It was "which NSPs filter", not "which NSPs filter customers" Different question with a different answer.
--FCuugMFkClbJLl1L Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
IMO, Commercial ISPs should never filter customer packets unless=20 specifically requested to do so by the customer, or in response to a=20 security/abuse incident.=20
Consumer ISPs are much more likely to have clauses in the AUPs that are=20 enforced premptively via packet filtering - antispoof filters (honestly,=20 antispoof filtering is, IMHO, the one expection to my "commercial ISPs=20 should not filter" rule), port blocks to prevent customers running=20 servers, outbound SMTP blocks to off-provider systems to stop direct-to-MX= =20 spamming, ICMP rate limiting, et al. All of which are fine by me as long=20 as they clearly assert their right to do so in their AUP - that is, as=20 long as there's a comparable provider I can use instead.
-C
On Sun, Aug 04, 2002 at 02:37:12PM +0000, bmanning@karoshi.com wrote:
Good day, =20 What NSPs do filter packets, and can really deal with DoS and DDoS atta= cks? =20 -Abdullah Bin Hamad A.K.A Arabian =20 The shorter shorter list would be the NSPs that do NOT filter
=20 packets. I can't think of an NSP that does not filter. =20 --bill
--FCuugMFkClbJLl1L Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9Te7GqP/YiunDNcERAt1+AJ0fT1Zp88n+1vDPzMnszf1FZrFRQQCg2u2M iGNyH2z/A9SLMwuudeCZILw= =pWj4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--FCuugMFkClbJLl1L--