[noCensorship] Re: KSA proxies
- From: "aasa37" <aasa37@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <nocensorship@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 18:33:25 +0300
----- 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 ===============
Other related posts:
