nanog mailing list archives
Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden
From: dlr () bungi com (Dave Rand)
Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 10:19:03 -0700
[In the message entitled "Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden" on May 1, 12:25, "Jay R. Ashworth" writes:]
Ok, so here's a question for your, Dave: do you have a procedure for entertaining requests to be excluded from your replies from people with legitimate needs to operate MTA's, who have been given (let us say) static addresses by their providers which fall within a range you understand to be dialup? (I'm assuming you include cable and DSL end-user address pools; this is the sort of thing I'm asking about.)
Of course, Jay. First off, static addresses don't belong on the DUL (unless the ISP chooses to list them). Second, any address can be removed by the ISP (even if it is a /32 in the middle of an otherwise all dynamic /16). End-users are directed to have their ISP contact us, as we *do not* take the end-users word for it. A quick note to dul () mail-abuse com will get it handled. --
Current thread:
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Jay R. Ashworth (May 01)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Jay R. Ashworth (May 01)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Jay R. Ashworth (May 01)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Jay R. Ashworth (May 01)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Jay R. Ashworth (May 01)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Jay R. Ashworth (May 01)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Valdis . Kletnieks (May 01)
- Message not available
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Valdis . Kletnieks (May 01)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Valdis . Kletnieks (May 01)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Jay R. Ashworth (May 01)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Dave Rand (May 01)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Mark Andrews (May 01)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Paul Vixie (May 02)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Mark Andrews (May 01)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Joe Maimon (May 01)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Suresh Ramasubramanian (May 02)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Steven Champeon (May 02)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Joe Maimon (May 02)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Steven Champeon (May 02)
- Re: Schneier: ISPs should bear security burden Valdis . Kletnieks (May 02)