Below is a response I received after one of my customers complained
about being unable to reach
http://www.usace.army.mil . Note that the "China net class A network"
reffered to is 203.x.x.x . Note also that this was received twelve
months ago and access has since been restored.
> Phillip, Based on the information we have there is currently no
> justification to open that network. The China net Class A network was
> blocked several months ago due to very high volumes of malicious
> traffic that threatened the security of our army networks. If you can
> provide a specific reason to access the Corp of Engineer site then
> we can re-evaluate your request. If you can have the USACE folks
> contact us and verify your need, that can help to further justify
> your requirement. At this point, there is no reason for us to open
> the Chinanet host to our networks.
> John L King Team Leader, Current Operations RCERT-CONUS Com (520)
> 538-2482 DSN 879-2482 Ft. Huachuca, AZ
I esecially liked this comment that appeared in the middle of the email
trail as it was forwarded from person to person;
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cartagena, Adelina USANETA
> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 3:30 PM
> To: Ludwig, David E USANETA
> Subject: FW: <http://www.usace.army.mil>
> Another one.
Jeff Williams wrote:
> Patrick and all,
> Well thank you for posting here regarding this seemingly ongoing
> problem stemming it seems from APNIC allocation policy changes of
> late. I have recently forwarded these postings from Nznog along to
> APNIC for their attention as I an CC'ing this one as well.
> Patrick Quinn-Graham wrote:
>> I have in the last two days watched hundreds of connections come in
>> to my smtp server, all of which comes from an ISP in Taiwan.
>> I am progressivly just blocking large chunks of their address
>> If I had the time or the knowledge of where to find the info I
>> would block the entire reagon. (Why can't they see the We don't
>> relay without authentication and leave?)
>> Granted, however, this is blocking them from wasting my mailservers
>> time deciding to reject their relay attempts. I can certainly
>> understand the frustration that people would get.
>> Sorry if this is off topic... I don't post here often, and will
>> probably not again for a while.
>> Cheers, Patrick.
>> On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Joe Abley wrote:
>>> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:35:10 -0400 From: Joe Abley
>>> <***@automagic.org> To: ***@list.waikato.ac.nz Subject:
>>> [nznog] people blocking "all APNIC space"
>>> There's recurring wisdom on other lists that people outside the
>>> Asia Pacific region routinely block "all APNIC space" in order to
>>> reduce the amount of spam they receive (the most recent example
>>> was on NANOG, when someone inferred that APNIC address space was
>>> useless because it is so regularly blocked).
>>> I've run MTAs numbered within 202/8 and 203/8 before, and I've
>>> never noticed a problem; if the practice of blocking all APNIC
>>> space was that commonplace, I would have expected to have
>>> noticed. Maybe I was just lucky, or maybe these block-happy ISPs
>>> don't include 202/8 and 203/8 in "all APNIC space".
>>> Anybody here noticed widespread blocking of any APNIC ranges by
>>> ISPs elsewhere in the world?
>>> _______________________________________________ Nznog mailing
>>> list ***@list.waikato.ac.nz
>> _______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list
> -- Jeffrey A. Williams Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 129k
> members/stakeholders strong!)
> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail
> ***@ix.netcom.com Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801
> _______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list