nanog mailing list archives
Re: Providers removing blocks on port 135?
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 10:48:32 -0400 (EDT)
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Adam Hall wrote:
Anyone know anything about prorviders removing ACLs from their routers to allow ports 135/445/4444 back into their network? Curious only because customers are calling in saying that Verizon, Cox, Bellsouth, and DSL.net are doing so and seem to have a big problem with the fact that we're hesitent follow their lead.
Well, first you would have to find providers willing to say they had ACLs, then willing to say the ACLs that didn't exist are being removed. Although 135, 139, 445, etc ACLs still seem to be very wide-spread, they are not network or service provider wide. It may vary by region, provider, wholesale arrangement, etc. A provider may have some ACLs in Atlanta, but not in Boston. Or even in the same city, some circuits may go through different wholesale arrangements resulting in different ACLs.
Current thread:
- Re: Providers removing blocks on port 135?, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: Providers removing blocks on port 135? Mike Tancsa (Sep 23)
- Re: Providers removing blocks on port 135? Jack Bates (Sep 23)
- Re: Providers removing blocks on port 135? Mike Tancsa (Sep 23)
- Re: Providers removing blocks on port 135? Jack Bates (Sep 23)
- Re: Providers removing blocks on port 135? Mike Tancsa (Sep 23)
- Re: Providers removing blocks on port 135? Justin Shore (Sep 23)
- Re: Providers removing blocks on port 135? Owen DeLong (Sep 21)
- Re: Providers removing blocks on port 135? Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 21)
- Re: Providers removing blocks on port 135? Petri Helenius (Sep 21)
- Re: Providers removing blocks on port 135? Jack Bates (Sep 19)