anyone know if comcast residential filters 139/445?
randy
On Sunday, September 11, 2016, Randy Bush wrote:
> anyone know if comcast residential filters 139/445?
>
> randy
>
https://customer.xfinity.com/help-and-support/internet/list-of-blocked-ports/
https://customer.xfinity.com/help-and-support/internet/list-of-blocked-ports/
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Original message
From: Randy Bush
Date: 9/11/16 2:35 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: North American Network Operators' Group
Subject: comcast and msoft ports
a
sigh. well that was some fun hours debugging; not.
thanks
randy
Having those ports exposed to the Internet is scary. Comcast is right in
blocking them.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Original message
From: Randy Bush
Date: 9/11/16 2:48 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: Ca By
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
Subject: Re: c
If you really need them, you'll need to use some sort of tunneling
mechanism, ie PPTP.
Regards,
Filip
On 11.9.2016 21:21, Ryan, Spencer wrote:
Having those ports exposed to the Internet is scary. Comcast is right in
blocking them.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
On Sun, 11 Sep 2016, Randy Bush wrote:
sigh. well that was some fun hours debugging; not.
135/137/139/445 has seen widespread filtering since... errr.. 2000? I know
it was widely done back in those days when people were connecting their
computers directly to the bridged modem/ETTH jack and
On Sunday, September 11, 2016, Filip Hruska wrote:
> If you really need them, you'll need to use some sort of tunneling
> mechanism, ie PPTP.
>
>
Friendly reminder, next week ios 10 drops
Prepare servers for iOS 10 & macOS Sierra. Crypto Deprecations:
- SSLv3
- RC4
- PPTP VPN
support.apple.com
On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 06:55:59AM -0700, Stephen Satchell wrote:
> Would someone at Charter Communications who is on this list indicate the
> roll-out schedule for IPv6 to business customers using cable modems as
> opposed to fiber links?
I too would appreciate this information. I do see more
Hopefully this is operational enough, though obviously leaning more towards the
policy side of things:
What does nanog think about a DDoS scrubber hijacking a network "for defensive
purposes"?
http://krebsonsecurity.com/2016/09/alleged-vdos-proprietors-arrested-in-israel/
"For about six hours,
On Sunday, September 11, 2016, Hugo Slabbert wrote:
> Hopefully this is operational enough, though obviously leaning more
> towards the policy side of things:
>
> What does nanog think about a DDoS scrubber hijacking a network "for
> defensive purposes"?
Not ok.
Never.
>
> http://krebsonsecu
In discussions with the reseller he admitted that they market the distance
based on average TX power and average link loss, so it is possible to
purchase optics that may not be able to attain certain necessary link
budgets and therefore distances.
There are 1270/1310 nm BiDi optics with a worst-ca
13 matches
Mail list logo