On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 08:53:48 -0500, James Kaufman <jmk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 11:02:49PM -0700, Charles Heselton wrote: > > > > I have 2 windows boxen, 1 (sometimes 2) fedora boxen, and 6 Sun boxes > > that all connect through a switch and Smoothwall configuration. I use > > Cox as my ISP, which recently just upgraded their service to 4Mbps > > down and 512 Kbps up. Never had any problems there, other than them > > blocking server ports (80, 25, etc.) > ----------------------------------- > > To me, that sounds unfriendly. If you simply want to receive content then most > ISP's are 'friendly'. If you want to serve content, then you have to look > harder. I can see how some might think that was "unfriendly". However, the ISP doesn't care whether it's M$ IIS or Linux Apache that's being run on port 80. They don't care whether it's M$ Exchange or Sendmail that's listening on port 25. They block all (or both) indiscriminately. So while it may be SERVER unfriendly, I wouldn't agree that's it LINUX unfriendly. It's also a decent security measure. Blocking (especially) port 25 can help to stop some worms from propogating. <SNIP> > > > > -- > > Charlie Heselton > > Network Security Engineer > > > > -- > Jim Kaufman > Linux Evangelist > public key 0x6D802619 > --- > Some people like my advice so much that they frame it upon the wall instead of > using it. > -- Gordon R. Dickson > > > > > -- > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list > -- Charlie Heselton Network Security Engineer
