From owner-freebsd-chat Sat Sep 25 10:16:17 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (GndRsh.dnsmgr.net [198.145.92.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A618814BB8; Sat, 25 Sep 1999 10:16:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA07859; Sat, 25 Sep 1999 10:12:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from freebsd) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <199909251712.KAA07859@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: On hub.freebsd.org refusing to talk to dialups In-Reply-To: from Pat Lynch at "Sep 25, 1999 09:44:28 am" To: lynch@bsdunix.net (Pat Lynch) Date: Sat, 25 Sep 1999 10:12:49 -0700 (PDT) Cc: ben@scientia.demon.co.uk (Ben Smithurst), current@FreeBSD.ORG, chat@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > yes, Dynamic dialups are the real problems. I have a static dialup, and > its essentially mine to do with what I want. its not counted among my > ISP's dialup pools. And if you signed the additional clauses to our AUP that basically places you at legal and financial risk for violation of the other parts of the AUP, with special respect to spamming, your static IP would be excluded from our filter. We just don't like to have to do this for an account that is anything less than a DS-1 loop, though it may be fractional DS-1. We really hate to do it for any dial up services, we will leave that business to the IP's who provide no real service. -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message