Barry Shein wrote:
> The idea is very simple, each site would be responsible for their own
> domain and to respond to simple remote requests for name to ip address
> mappings or back again.
Wrong. DNS is not that simple.
Domains and sites have, in general, independent topology
that sites can not
On Fri, 5 Sep 2014, Sander Steffann wrote:
> Well, you don't need addresses for clients, just for content... From
> the architecture page at http://named-data.net/project/archoverview/:
>
> "Note that neither Interest nor Data packets carry any host or
> interface addresses (such as IP addresse
Hello everyone!
I have a Juniper SRX firewall and in recent times I did had issues because
one or other user doing an attack outside. Usually it is compromised client
machines which create a lot of firewall sessions in outside direction.
I was thinking of two specific things as fix for this:
You would also need to not care about sending email to IPv6 domains.
Owen
On Sep 5, 2014, at 16:01 , ITechGeek wrote:
> As a replacement, you can use Amazon SES and verify single email addresses
> if you don't have access over the whole domain.
>
> -
>
> There would be a root, or multiple roots, which would respond to
> requests to locate who should be asked about a domain, for example if
> you want to know the ip address for world.std.com the conversation
> goes roughly:
>
>(To Root Server): Where is the COM server?
>(From Root S
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:40:08AM -0700, Paul Ferguson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 9/5/2014 7:35 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>
> > "Interface" sure.
> >
> > But the dangers of replacing actual /addresses/ with things which
> > are not is sufficiently well under
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:01:41PM -0400, ITechGeek wrote:
> As a replacement, you can use Amazon SES and verify single email addresses
> if you don't have access over the whole domain.
Not if you want people to accept your mail. Thanks to Amazon's policy
of (a) allowing unlimited spam and (b) ig
7 matches
Mail list logo
