Re: Cost of process creation on Unix
From: John E. Malmberg (wb8tyw_at_qsl.network)
Date: 10/17/03
- Next message: JF Mezei: "Re: Cost of process creation on Unix"
- Previous message: JF Mezei: "Re: Cost of process creation on Unix"
- In reply to: Martin P.J. Zinser: "Re: Cost of process creation on Unix"
- Next in thread: JF Mezei: "Re: Cost of process creation on Unix"
- Reply: JF Mezei: "Re: Cost of process creation on Unix"
- Reply: Martin P.J. Zinser: "Re: Cost of process creation on Unix"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 04:04:46 GMT
Martin P.J. Zinser wrote:
>
> Same over here, Comcast just delivers the bits and an IP address, the
> rest is handled via a small router and my VMS system. And having a look
> at the various logs I think trying to defend a Windows system in such a
> setup would be more a less a full time job (and most probably futile in
> the end ;-)
And both comcast.net and sympatico.ca have submitted the addresses that
you and JF Mezei are using to be blocked as dynamically supplied
addresses to any mail server or blocking list operators that ask them.
http://informatie.easynet.nl/error/errors.html#dynablock
The easynet.nl page references the AUP for both networks that states
that no mail servers are allowed on either network.
Comcast has an exception for specific rDNS addresses.
To look up your I.P. address in the dynablock list and others, you can
use the moensted.dk link. Read the disclaimer. Some of the lists will
list an entire subnet on the first sign of spam and never remove it.
So being in some lists is almost meaningless.
If you are running your own mail server and you are in the dynablock
list, it means that your ISP is saying that your I.P. address is subject
to change with out notice and/or you are not allowed to run a mail server.
If that is incorrect, then you should contact your ISP to get them to
stop listing your IP as a dynamic one and get the dynablock listing
corrected.
My broadband ISP in their internal newsgroups says that they are getting
the dhcp ranges from the other consumer ISPs and putting them in their
local blocking lists, and that they are providing their DHCP ranges to
them in return. The information in the dynablock.easynet.nl is probably
a good indication of what your ISP is providing to other ISPs.
Note that the dynablock.easynet.nl list is not a list of I.P.s that sent
spam, it is a list of IPs that your ISP has identified as not to ever be
sending e-mail and are OK to preemptively block.
Easynet.nl states that they are willing to remove any I.P. address that
should not be in it when your ISP requests it.
-John
wb8tyw@qsl.network
Personal Opinion Only
- Next message: JF Mezei: "Re: Cost of process creation on Unix"
- Previous message: JF Mezei: "Re: Cost of process creation on Unix"
- In reply to: Martin P.J. Zinser: "Re: Cost of process creation on Unix"
- Next in thread: JF Mezei: "Re: Cost of process creation on Unix"
- Reply: JF Mezei: "Re: Cost of process creation on Unix"
- Reply: Martin P.J. Zinser: "Re: Cost of process creation on Unix"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|