----- Original Message ----- From: "wayne" <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <nocensorship@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 10:48 PM Subject: [noCensorship] Re: KSA proxies > > From: "aasa37" <aasa37@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > To: <nocensorship@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: [noCensorship] Re: KSA proxies > > > >The fact that from the KSA, you can telnet elsewhere > > > on that port 7021 (proving it's open), yet SP sees these 64.83.129.10:7021 > > timing out > > > intrigues me. > > > > Some IRC blocks certain ISP's IP's after some abuse , could it be the case > > here ? but here its for http !!? > > I'm not familiar with how that's done. It might be the same, but they > probably allow you to connect and then drop the connection. If they > do it that way (rather than by a firewall rule), you should see a > 'F'(ail) in the statProxy results, not a 'T'(imeout). I would need > to check the code to be sure about that though :-) > You are right Wayne , the IRC ( dalnet if i remember correctly ) does allow the connection then it dropes it in a few seconds with a funny message saying something like "thanks to the abuses from your sides " or something ...they don't seem to have a problem with collective punishment :-) , which we are used to in this region of the world any way :-) ...( i think iam blabbing !!! may be its Ramadan effects :-) , what that got to do with anything !! :-) .GOD !!! > You could just shove them in file.txt, and run statProxy: > perl statProxy.pl -t all:-18 -l file.txt > > If you could do that, and don't know where they are, I will take > them as being in awalnet and kill them off if they > timeout/refuse/fail. They are probably all old awalnet proxies. statProxy v4.95 report from 213.184.x.x: 212.93.193.87 :8080 PFFFPPPPPPPPPFFPFP 1.1/6.3 212.93.193.76 :8080 PFFFPFPPPPPPPFFPFP 1.0/4.3 212.93.194.244 :80 T ?/? 212.93.194.114 :80 T ?/? 212.93.200.218 :80 PFFFFFFPFFFFPFFPFP 2.5/17.4 212.93.193.81 :8080 PFFFPFPPPPPPPFFPFP 1.0/6.3 212.93.193.132 :8080 T ?/? 212.93.193.86 :8080 T ?/? 212.93.200.226 :80 AFFFFFFFFFFFF FFFF 0.6/? 212.93.193.138 :8080 PFFFFFFPFFFFPPFPFP 4.0/27.9 212.93.194.163 :80 PFFFPPPPPPPPPPFPFP 4.1/7.7 212.93.193.77 :8080 PFFFPFPPPPPPPFFPFP 1.0/6.7 212.93.193.88 :8080 PFFFPFPPPPPPPFFPFP 1.0/6.1 212.93.193.82 :80 T ?/? 212.93.199.106 :80 T ?/? 212.93.194.245 :80 T ?/? 212.93.203.254 :80 T ?/? 212.93.195.56 :80 T ?/? 212.93.198.146 :8080 T ?/? 212.93.204.194 :80 PFFFPFPPPPPPPPFPFP 5.6/11.0 212.93.193.83 :80 T ?/? 212.93.193.89 :8080 PFFFPFPPPPPPPFFPFP 1.0/4.2 212.93.193.85 :8080 T ?/? Reference page size was 13744 bytes The following 1 proxies were rejected because safe mode is on (-u to turn it off): 212.93.200.218:3128: duplicate host > > Roundtrip time to 64.83.129.10, average = 469ms, min = 441ms, max = 498ms -- > > 09-Nov-02 9:11:15 PM > > With that kind of rtt, geostationary satellite internet must look > very attractive :-) :-) how come you did not talk about DSL and chose satellite internet ? i mean , is satellite internet better than DSL ? i thought the opposit !? DSL is offered here now with these prices : 1- around 300 USD for instellation fees and a modem , one non-returnable payment , 2- around 300 USD monthly payment ( 128 kbps , they say 33kB min garanteed for downloading ) 3- 3 weeks min till the service is provided . How is this compared to DSL in usa or canada ? And just to make sure :-) , we will be able to use the same methods to bypass , correct ? thank you . ===8>============== noCensorship community =============== List's webpage: //www.freelists.org/webpage/nocensorship List's archive: //www.freelists.org/archives/nocensorship To unsubscribe: nocensorship-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the SUBJECT field. Moderator's email: nocensorship-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ===8>============== noCensorship community ===============