Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 11:41:39 -0500 From: Jacques Vidrine <n@nectar.com> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Filtering port 25 Message-ID: <19990925164139.6B93DBE08@gw.nectar.com> In-Reply-To: <199909251604.JAA07646@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> References: <199909251604.JAA07646@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 25 September 1999 at 9:04, "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > > At 07:35 PM 9/24/99 -0500, Jacques Vidrine wrote: > > > > >I am not advocating making it easy for spammers. The RBL has been a > > >huge help, and the DUL looks potentially even more helpful. I just > > >object to blocking legitimate traffic. > > Lets see here, the DUL effectively _blocks_ port 25 connections at > the _destination_ point of the connection. The DUL is an opt-in, however, and not ubiquitous. A corporate office may use the DUL, but make exceptions as necessary for its roaming users. > All we are doing is moving the filter point from the receipent point > to the closest we can get to the transmission point. Further more, > since not everyone is running the DUL, we are insuring that the > policy we want in place is being enforced to the best of our > ability. Jacques said DUL okay, but me filtering at the source not > okay. He is in self conflict. Please examine internal operations > and diagnose :-) DUL is opt-in. Filtering is draconian. They are quite different. Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / nectar@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990925164139.6B93DBE08>