List Archive: gentoo-security
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
* Trevor Lauder <trevor@...> 8. Jan 04
> Ben Cressey said:
> > [full quote sniped]
> The post above is probably the most logical post on this subject to this
> list so far.
That's your opinion.
> No one is slowing down the "net" or causing problems for other people
> by using DROP instead of REJECT.
I have to wait for the timeout if I unfortunately send a request to you.
You slow down me.
Imagin one second please if there wouldn't be any ICMP3/3 in the whole
net. Please think about this. And please drop a penny into the piggy
bank for any reaching your server/gateway from outside.
> Calling people stupid because they don't follow your interpretation of
> the RFC does nothing but lower your credibility on the subject.
So, what standards do we follow now? Anarchy on the net? Bind smtp to
80? That would give fun. And I give a damn shit that you have to
config your MTA, this is my server, I do what I want with it.
> People might say that it is "polite" to send a reply back, but why
> should I be polite to a uninvited and unwanted connection attempt on a
> port that isn't even open?
Thank you for making clear, that you don't want to communicate. Thank
you for making clear, that you are an egoistic fool. Thank you for
making clear, that you want to be an unsocial punchy.
email@example.com mailing list