On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Threat? How is this a threat? Who have I threatened? I think this is an issue that needs to be talked about. Give me a reason why it's not important to DSL customers, and I'll listen as always.
I think that the costs of Jetstream are a problem still, but the problem with your proposed solution, as I see it is: These worms are really only using up a measurable amount of your bandwidth if they find something on port 80 or 25 to talk to and carry on a conversation. On my M11, all I have to do is remove the pinhole mappings for those ports and the problem of being probed (almost) goes away. At the expense of now not being able to run my little web and mail servers, which were the whole reason I have Jetstream with a static IP in the first place. DoS type flooding is another matter, of course, but since they tend to be generated with random port numbers, etc. to try and avoid filters, I don't think your 'per service selector' that you suggested the ISPs implement is going to do much to prevent them. --Colin. ** Colin Palmer, Systems and Development Group, University of Waikato, NZ ** --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog