1 |
* Trevor Lauder <trevor@××××××××××.net> 8. Jan 04 |
2 |
> Ben Cressey said: |
3 |
> > [full quote sniped] |
4 |
> The post above is probably the most logical post on this subject to this |
5 |
> list so far. |
6 |
|
7 |
That's your opinion. |
8 |
|
9 |
> No one is slowing down the "net" or causing problems for other people |
10 |
> by using DROP instead of REJECT. |
11 |
|
12 |
I have to wait for the timeout if I unfortunately send a request to you. |
13 |
You slow down me. |
14 |
|
15 |
Imagin one second please if there wouldn't be any ICMP3/3 in the whole |
16 |
net. Please think about this. And please drop a penny into the piggy |
17 |
bank for any reaching your server/gateway from outside. |
18 |
|
19 |
> Calling people stupid because they don't follow your interpretation of |
20 |
> the RFC does nothing but lower your credibility on the subject. |
21 |
|
22 |
So, what standards do we follow now? Anarchy on the net? Bind smtp to |
23 |
80? That would give fun. And I give a damn shit that you have to |
24 |
config your MTA, this is my server, I do what I want with it. |
25 |
|
26 |
> People might say that it is "polite" to send a reply back, but why |
27 |
> should I be polite to a uninvited and unwanted connection attempt on a |
28 |
> port that isn't even open? |
29 |
|
30 |
Thank you for making clear, that you don't want to communicate. Thank |
31 |
you for making clear, that you are an egoistic fool. Thank you for |
32 |
making clear, that you want to be an unsocial punchy. |
33 |
|
34 |
Regards, Frank. |
35 |
-- |
36 |
Sigmentation fault |
37 |
|
38 |
-- |
39 |
gentoo-security@g.o mailing list |