Re: Is the .to (Tonga) domain completely rogue and should be removed?
[ In reply to a private message from Jeremy Porter. ]
Maybe you should post a clarification that you do not feel RBL is the same a terriorism. That is certainly the appearance you gave. In all the messages in the thread posted to nanog my was the only replace that suggested solutions, and it was on topic.
Done. Yes, when I mentioned the T-word, I was not refering to the RBL. The RBL is voluntary and allows people to deny others access to THEIR OWN machines. It has nothing to do with people trying to deny others access to machines the perpetrators do NOT own - that is what I take issue with.
Your accusations of terrorism, stupidity and your pity are not needed on Nanog, perhaps on other mailing lists such comments are reasonable.
I see absolutely no call for you to be advocating denial of service attacks anywhere - and ESPECIALLY not on NANOG, where everyone *knows better anyhow*. The knife cuts both ways. I hope no one using an nstc.com account, or an account at my upstream, ever even comes close to getting you upset because it sounds like in a situation like that, you would advocate a DoS attack against the network involved. I'm sorry, but I am not retracting my statement that that IS terrorism, and there is absolutely no call for it, and if you commit a DoS attack you deserve whatever sanctions you get hit with, either by your upstream or the law. Period. -- Anyone who spams me will be subject to torture by Jake, my killer attack hedgehog, and/or Lizzy and Junior, my man-eating iguanas.
I never advocated a DoS attack, as a matter of fact I specificly said I did would not advocate it. I did say it would solve the problem. DoS attacks are against the AUP I wrote for my company and applies to my customers. I've terminated people for violating it. Quote from message: Message-Id: <199809302119.QAA01729@freeside.fc.net> From: Jeremy Porter <jerry@freeside.fc.net> ... Not that I would advocate such activity... As far as the technical merits of this, it should be observed that anyone unprepared to deal with DoS is foolish, and at this time the chance of successfully prosecuting someone for a DoS attack is very low, and from what I've been able to see in my time in the business most of the attacks are on high profile targets. (What sites get smurfed the most?, three letters IRC...) I can't control what say about what I write, but the proof is in the mail archive. If I was the type of person you claim, you would be seeing a demand for an apology or lawsuit. Since I'm not, I won't, and frankly I doubt anyone that knows me would believe you anyway. Perhaps you can say something useful, after you learn to read. And to note: I took the personal comments off the CC lists. This individual was the one that felt he had to post personal attacks on Nanog about someone he apparently doesn't even know. You make me want to puke. In message <19980930233226.35526@shell.nacs.net>, "Steven J. Sobol" writes:
[ In reply to a private message from Jeremy Porter. ]
Maybe you should post a clarification that you do not feel RBL is the same a terriorism. That is certainly the appearance you gave. In all the messages in the thread posted to nanog my was the only replace that suggested solutions, and it was on topic.
Done. Yes, when I mentioned the T-word, I was not refering to the RBL. The RBL is voluntary and allows people to deny others access to THEIR OWN machines. It has nothing to do with people trying to deny others access to machines the perpetrators do NOT own - that is what I take issue with.
Your accusations of terrorism, stupidity and your pity are not needed on Nanog, perhaps on other mailing lists such comments are reasonable.
I see absolutely no call for you to be advocating denial of service attacks anywhere - and ESPECIALLY not on NANOG, where everyone *knows better anyhow*.
The knife cuts both ways.
I hope no one using an nstc.com account, or an account at my upstream, ever even comes close to getting you upset because it sounds like in a situation like that, you would advocate a DoS attack against the network involved. I'm sorry, but I am not retracting my statement that that IS terrorism, and there is absolutely no call for it, and if you commit a DoS attack you deserve whatever sanctions you get hit with, either by your upstream or the law.
Period.
--
Anyone who spams me will be subject to torture by Jake, my killer attack hedgehog, and/or Lizzy and Junior, my man-eating iguanas.
--- Jeremy Porter, Freeside Communications, Inc. jerry@fc.net PO BOX 80315 Austin, Tx 78708 | 512-458-9810 http://www.fc.net
On Thu, Oct 01, 1998 at 12:09:11AM -0500, Jeremy Porter wrote:
Not that I would advocate such activity...
What point was there in even bringing up DoS? Yeah, you said you don't advocate such activity. Fine. Then don't suggest using it. As for personal attacks, my direct comment was about the action you were speaking of. I believe my words were to the effect that YOUR STATEMENT was stupid, not that YOU were stupid. -- Anyone who spams me will be subject to torture by Jake, my killer attack hedgehog, and/or Lizzy and Junior, my man-eating iguanas.
participants (2)
-
Jeremy Porter -
Steven J. Sobol