nanog mailing list archives
Re: RFC 1918 addresses
From: "Matthew James Gering" <mgering () ricochet net>
Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 22:02:31 -0700
Exposing an RFC 1918 private address in, say, a "Received:" header in
is less of a problem, though the spammers who do it are actually better
able
to cover their origins, there's no way to prevent it and no normal damage
from doing it.
Unless the SMTP server used to proxy email through a firewall is able to strip headers, it's unavoidable. I would like to see that feature added to SMTP servers, however, I do hate letting internal host names and addresses out. Matt
Current thread:
- Re: RFC 1918 addresses Paul A Vixie (May 31)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: RFC 1918 addresses Matthew James Gering (May 31)
- Re: RFC 1918 addresses Deepak Jain (Jun 01)
- Re: RFC 1918 addresses prue (Jun 02)