Re: setting up lax security on one ethernet interface while leaving the other strict
- From: David Schwartz <davids@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2008 17:50:56 -0700 (PDT)
On Sep 27, 7:43 pm, ibupro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Moe Trin) wrote:
So as far as I can tell, the risk is raised to precisely zero. I have
used groups.google.com for years and have never had a post that was
not seen.
Where have you been looking? On google? Wow, google doesn't filter
posts from google - there's a surprise. I'd bet if you looked harder,
you would find specific *public* news servers that block posts from
groups.google.com, never mind non-public servers (like those run
by my or my wife's employers).
Ah, so in your world, a post that doesn't go to every news server is
"not seen". In that case, every post is "not seen" and *nothing*
increases the changes that a post will be "not seen" since there is no
way to raise the probability beyond a certainty.
News is a service, not a protocol.
Web servers that serve news are "real news server"s.
Are they serving news on port 119 or 563?
Ah, so the *port* a news server serves news on is what makes a news
server "real". You know that's nonsense.
Do they follow RFC0977,
RFC1036, or RFC3977? Or do they alter news posts - as google does.
As I said, news is a service not a protocol. Are you going to ignore
that argument or address it?
The real question is how may people just IGNORE google crap
Given the fact that many news readers can filter on the Message-ID:
header, and everyone and their goat has published simple instructions
on how to do so, it's rather difficult to guess how many ignore google
_crap_ verses how many ignore all posts from google (whether in one
or all newsgroups they may read).
So, in other words, you have no idea.
DS
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- setting up lax security on one ethernet interface while leaving the other strict
- From: dan
- Re: setting up lax security on one ethernet interface while leaving the other strict
- From: Moe Trin
- Re: setting up lax security on one ethernet interface while leaving the other strict
- From: David Schwartz
- Re: setting up lax security on one ethernet interface while leaving the other strict
- From: Send
- Re: setting up lax security on one ethernet interface while leaving the other strict
- From: Moe Trin
- setting up lax security on one ethernet interface while leaving the other strict
- Prev by Date: Re: setting up lax security on one ethernet interface while leaving the other strict
- Next by Date: IP over FC, Qlogic QLE2460 and Debian Linux
- Previous by thread: Re: setting up lax security on one ethernet interface while leaving the other strict
- Next by thread: Re: setting up lax security on one ethernet interface while leaving the other strict
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
