As most of the regular readers know I have been operating my fotopic 
site
http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/
for just over 2 months.

As part of that site's facilities I get a weekly report on the top 
visitors. Last week's highest had the highest number at 361 hits with 
the next nearest being 97 hits - and the next highest were all about 
that number.

What 'concerns' me <tongue slightly in cheek> is that the last part of 
the top visitor's address is
(first part removed..) washdc.east.verizon.net

Can someone shed any light on this address? Am I being monitored by some 
secret agent in a deep, dark, recess in Washington DC because of the 
caption I've put on Cliff's photo at
http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p51819376.html
there have been over 1000 hits on this picture alone.

If there is someone who is genuinely interested in the photos please do 
let me know and put me out of misery :-))

<ducks while others try to put me out of their misery>

<slinks away to fx of Paranoia by Black Sabbath at loud volume>

-- 
Mike Hughes
A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton
at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England
Interested in American trains real and model?
Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/

Well according to some BTP officers thinking, you are a photogher so must 
therefore be a terrorist, maybe the CIA are thinking along the same lines.

"Mike Hughes"  wrote in message 
news:6UAUYWC57vkIFws3@mikehughes.demon.co.uk...
> As most of the regular readers know I have been operating my fotopic site
> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/
> for just over 2 months.
>
> As part of that site's facilities I get a weekly report on the top 
> visitors. Last week's highest had the highest number at 361 hits with the 
> next nearest being 97 hits - and the next highest were all about that 
> number.
>
> What 'concerns' me <tongue slightly in cheek> is that the last part of the 
> top visitor's address is
> (first part removed..) washdc.east.verizon.net
>
> Can someone shed any light on this address? Am I being monitored by some 
> secret agent in a deep, dark, recess in Washington DC because of the 
> caption I've put on Cliff's photo at
> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p51819376.html
> there have been over 1000 hits on this picture alone.
>
> If there is someone who is genuinely interested in the photos please do 
> let me know and put me out of misery :-))
>
> <ducks while others try to put me out of their misery>
>
> <slinks away to fx of Paranoia by Black Sabbath at loud volume>
>
> -- 
> Mike Hughes
> A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton
> at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England
> Interested in American trains real and model?
> Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/ 


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In message <8c923$48930114$7802@news.teranews.com>, Capture Boy 
 writes
>Well according to some BTP officers thinking, you are a photogher so must
>therefore be a terrorist, maybe the CIA are thinking along the same lines.
>
LOL

Have a look at the August issue of Taxi "talk" magazine 
(www.taxitalk.co.uk) when it's posted to the web i a couple of days to 
see an article and photos I've taken at Brighton!

>"Mike Hughes"  wrote in message
>news:6UAUYWC57vkIFws3@mikehughes.demon.co.uk...
>> As most of the regular readers know I have been operating my fotopic site
>> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/
>> for just over 2 months.
>>
>> As part of that site's facilities I get a weekly report on the top
>> visitors. Last week's highest had the highest number at 361 hits with the
>> next nearest being 97 hits - and the next highest were all about that
>> number.
>>
>> What 'concerns' me <tongue slightly in cheek> is that the last part of the
>> top visitor's address is
>> (first part removed..) washdc.east.verizon.net
>>
>> Can someone shed any light on this address? Am I being monitored by some
>> secret agent in a deep, dark, recess in Washington DC because of the
>> caption I've put on Cliff's photo at
>> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p51819376.html
>> there have been over 1000 hits on this picture alone.
>>
>> If there is someone who is genuinely interested in the photos please do
>> let me know and put me out of misery :-))
>>
>> <ducks while others try to put me out of their misery>
>>
>> <slinks away to fx of Paranoia by Black Sabbath at loud volume>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Hughes
>> A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton
>> at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England
>> Interested in American trains real and model?
>> Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/
>
>
>** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

-- 
Mike Hughes
A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton
at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England
Interested in American trains real and model?
Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/

In message 
          Mike Hughes  wrote:

> As most of the regular readers know I have been operating my fotopic 
> site
> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/
> for just over 2 months.
> 
> As part of that site's facilities I get a weekly report on the top 
> visitors. Last week's highest had the highest number at 361 hits with 
> the next nearest being 97 hits - and the next highest were all about 
> that number.
> 
> What 'concerns' me <tongue slightly in cheek> is that the last part of 
> the top visitor's address is
> (first part removed..) washdc.east.verizon.net
> 
> Can someone shed any light on this address? Am I being monitored by some 
> secret agent in a deep, dark, recess in Washington DC because of the 
> caption I've put on Cliff's photo at
> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p51819376.html
> there have been over 1000 hits on this picture alone.
> 
> If there is someone who is genuinely interested in the photos please do 
> let me know and put me out of misery :-))
> 
> <ducks while others try to put me out of their misery>
> 
> <slinks away to fx of Paranoia by Black Sabbath at loud volume>
> 

There are sites that can draw you a little map of where the 
address resolves to physically, and who the IP blongs too if
you are really worried - but it's more likely that someone found
it funny as passed the link around the office or whatever (so
you only see their gateway IP address). If it were Uncle Sam 
looking for some silo's they've lost, the IP would be fake
anyway......

Cheers
Richard 

-- 
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk       sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
              I have become... comfortably numb

In article , Mike Hughes 
 writes
>What 'concerns' me <tongue slightly in cheek> is that the last part of 
>the top visitor's address is
>(first part removed..) washdc.east.verizon.net
>
>Can someone shed any light on this address? Am I being monitored by 
>some secret agent in a deep, dark, recess in Washington DC

No.

Verizon is a big consumer ISP. This simply means the reader is connected 
via their DC node, which is in their eastern division.

No more suspicious than ....london.southeast.bigisp.co.uk.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather                       | Home: 
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work)             | Web:  <http://www.davros.org>
Fax: +44 870 051 9937                    | Work: 
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

"Mike Hughes"  wrote in message 
news:6UAUYWC57vkIFws3@mikehughes.demon.co.uk...
> As most of the regular readers know I have been operating my fotopic site
> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/
> for just over 2 months.
>
> As part of that site's facilities I get a weekly report on the top 
> visitors. Last week's highest had the highest number at 361 hits with the 
> next nearest being 97 hits - and the next highest were all about that 
> number.
>
> What 'concerns' me <tongue slightly in cheek> is that the last part of the 
> top visitor's address is
> (first part removed..) washdc.east.verizon.net
>
> Can someone shed any light on this address? Am I being monitored by some 
> secret agent in a deep, dark, recess in Washington DC because of the 
> caption I've put on Cliff's photo at
> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p51819376.html
> there have been over 1000 hits on this picture alone.
>
> If there is someone who is genuinely interested in the photos please do 
> let me know and put me out of misery :-))
>

Perhaps the Cliff Richard fan club (Washington Branch) like the photo ?

Bevan

On Aug 1, 8:17 pm, "Bevan Price" <meVIAfreeukFULLSTOPcom> wrote:
> "Mike Hughes"  wrote in message
> news:6UAUYWC57vkIFws3@mikehughes.demon.co.uk...
> >Am I being monitored by some
> > secret agent in a deep, dark, recess in Washington DC because of
> >the caption I've put on Cliff's photo at
> >http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p51819376.html
> > there have been over 1000 hits on this picture alone.

> Perhaps the Cliff Richard fan club (Washington Branch) like the
> photo ?


Perhaps the Apostrophe Protection Society don't like the caption.

On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 13:18:01 +0100, Mike Hughes  
 wrote:

> As most of the regular readers know I have been operating my fotopic site
> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/
> for just over 2 months.
>
> As part of that site's facilities I get a weekly report on the top  
> visitors. Last week's highest had the highest number at 361 hits with  
> the next nearest being 97 hits - and the next highest were all about  
> that number.
>
> What 'concerns' me <tongue slightly in cheek> is that the last part of  
> the top visitor's address is
> (first part removed..) washdc.east.verizon.net
>
> Can someone shed any light on this address? Am I being monitored by some  
> secret agent in a deep, dark, recess in Washington DC because of the  
> caption I've put on Cliff's photo at
> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p51819376.html
> there have been over 1000 hits on this picture alone.
>
> If there is someone who is genuinely interested in the photos please do  
> let me know and put me out of misery :-))
>
> <ducks while others try to put me out of their misery>
>
> <slinks away to fx of Paranoia by Black Sabbath at loud volume>
>

Perhaps it just shows that the US national security bods have a sense of
humour as well!

Fred X

In message <op.ue73ldb6j3tnem@skynet.wag54gs>
          "Fred X"  wrote:

[snip]
> 
> Perhaps it just shows that the US national security bods have a sense of
> humour as well!
> 

You could never accuse them of having a sense of humour, a more po-faced
bunch I've never come across.  Latin American dictatorships have a better
sense of humour.

-- 
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html>

On Aug 1, 12:17 pm, "Bevan Price" <meVIAfreeukFULLSTOPcom> wrote:

> Perhaps the Cliff Richard fan club (Washington Branch) like the photo ?

There's still a Cliff Richard fan club?

I'd heard he'd passed on due to alcohol poisoning.

-Pete

On Aug 1, 12:40 pm, "Fred X"  wrote:

> Perhaps it just shows that the US national security bods have a sense of
> humour as well!

(In Bugs Bunny's voice): He don't know them very well, do he?

-Pete

"beamendsltd"  wrote in message 
news:8e5fc84f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com...
>
> There are sites that can draw you a little map of where the
> address resolves to physically, and who the IP blongs too if
> you are really worried - but it's more likely that someone found
> it funny as passed the link around the office or whatever (so
> you only see their gateway IP address). If it were Uncle Sam
> looking for some silo's they've lost, the IP would be fake
> anyway......
>
> Cheers
> Richard
>
> -- 
> www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk       sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
>              I have become... comfortably numb

Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the 
response get back to you ?

Cheers,
Simon

"Mike Hughes"  wrote in message 
news:6UAUYWC57vkIFws3@mikehughes.demon.co.uk...

> <slinks away to fx of Paranoia by Black Sabbath at loud volume>
>
> -- 
> Mike Hughes
> A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton
> at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England
> Interested in American trains real and model?
> Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/

Does it matter which Black Sabbath track you play - they all sound alike to 
me, and have never understood any of the words. Especially when live 
(Leicester De Montfort 197....something).

Cheers,
Simon

Mike Hughes wrote:
> In message <8c923$48930114$7802@news.teranews.com>, Capture Boy
>  writes
>>Well according to some BTP officers thinking, you are a photogher so must
>>therefore be a terrorist, maybe the CIA are thinking along the same lines.
>>
> LOL
<snip>
Just remember, even paranoids have real enemies.

        mark

On Aug 1, 1:51 pm, "simon"  wrote:

> Does it matter which Black Sabbath track you play - they all sound alike to
> me, and have never understood any of the words.

I think they pretty much all start out with something akin to
"LUCIFER, DO YOUR DUTY! SLAM MY HEAD AND SHAKE YOUR BOOTY!  WHAM! BAM!
THANK YOU NELL! WE'RE ALL ABOARD AMTRACK TO HELL!!" and rapidly go
downhill from there.

No, don't thank me.

-Pete

In message , Bevan Price 
<meVIAfreeukFULLSTOPcom@?.?.invalid> writes
>
>"Mike Hughes"  wrote in message
>news:6UAUYWC57vkIFws3@mikehughes.demon.co.uk...
>> As most of the regular readers know I have been operating my fotopic site
>> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/
>> for just over 2 months.
>>
>> As part of that site's facilities I get a weekly report on the top
>> visitors. Last week's highest had the highest number at 361 hits with the
>> next nearest being 97 hits - and the next highest were all about that
>> number.
>>
>> What 'concerns' me <tongue slightly in cheek> is that the last part of the
>> top visitor's address is
>> (first part removed..) washdc.east.verizon.net
>>
>> Can someone shed any light on this address? Am I being monitored by some
>> secret agent in a deep, dark, recess in Washington DC because of the
>> caption I've put on Cliff's photo at
>> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p51819376.html
>> there have been over 1000 hits on this picture alone.
>>
>> If there is someone who is genuinely interested in the photos please do
>> let me know and put me out of misery :-))
>>
>
>Perhaps the Cliff Richard fan club (Washington Branch) like the photo ?
>
Yes, but are the ones without COMMAn sense?

-- 
Mike Hughes
A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton
at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England
Interested in American trains real and model?
Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/

Fred X wrote:

> Perhaps it just shows that the US national security bods have a sense of
> humour as well!

I doubt they would appreciate the irony in your remark.
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p13857145.html
("Europe's Heaviest Train" plaque on 59 005 at Merehead, 26 Jun 1994)

In message , at 21:46:54 on 
Fri, 1 Aug 2008, simon  remarked:
>>If it were Uncle Sam
>> looking for some silo's they've lost, the IP would be fake

>Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the
>response get back to you ?

Not so much "fake" perhaps, as "stealth". Registered to a different 
entity that does not cause any suspicion.
-- 
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry"  wrote in message 
news:heOZywslUElIFAHy@perry.co.uk...
> In message , at 21:46:54 on Fri, 
> 1 Aug 2008, simon  remarked:
>>>If it were Uncle Sam
>>> looking for some silo's they've lost, the IP would be fake
>
>>Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the
>>response get back to you ?
>
> Not so much "fake" perhaps, as "stealth". Registered to a different entity 
> that does not cause any suspicion.
> -- 
> Roland Perry

Do you mean they dont use domain fbi.org - The rotters

Cheers,
Simon

"Twibil"  wrote in message 
news:838b825c-a52a-4c08-b760-e58c10d9ed11@r35g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 1, 1:51 pm, "simon"  wrote:

> Does it matter which Black Sabbath track you play - they all sound alike 
> to
> me, and have never understood any of the words.

I think they pretty much all start out with something akin to
"LUCIFER, DO YOUR DUTY! SLAM MY HEAD AND SHAKE YOUR BOOTY!  WHAM! BAM!
THANK YOU NELL! WE'RE ALL ABOARD AMTRACK TO HELL!!" and rapidly go
downhill from there.

No, don't thank me.

-Pete

You could be right, but its ok as it wasnt a burning question.

Cheers,
Simon

In message 
          "simon"  wrote:

> 
> "Roland Perry"  wrote in message 
> news:heOZywslUElIFAHy@perry.co.uk...
> > In message , at 21:46:54 on Fri, 
> > 1 Aug 2008, simon  remarked:
> >>>If it were Uncle Sam
> >>> looking for some silo's they've lost, the IP would be fake
> >
> >>Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the
> >>response get back to you ?
> >
> > Not so much "fake" perhaps, as "stealth". Registered to a different
> > entity  that does not cause any suspicion. --  Roland Perry
> 
> Do you mean they dont use domain fbi.org - The rotters
> 

fbi.gov shirley?

-- 
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html>

"Graeme Wall"  wrote in message 
news:cdb0bac84f%Rail@greywall.demon.co.uk...
> In message 
>          "simon"  wrote:
>
>>
>> "Roland Perry"  wrote in message
>> news:heOZywslUElIFAHy@perry.co.uk...
>> > In message , at 21:46:54 on 
>> > Fri,
>> > 1 Aug 2008, simon  remarked:
>> >>>If it were Uncle Sam
>> >>> looking for some silo's they've lost, the IP would be fake
>> >
>> >>Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the
>> >>response get back to you ?
>> >
>> > Not so much "fake" perhaps, as "stealth". Registered to a different
>> > entity  that does not cause any suspicion. --  Roland Perry
>>
>> Do you mean they dont use domain fbi.org - The rotters
>>
>
> fbi.gov shirley?
>
> -- 
> Graeme Wall
> This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
> Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html>

Has gov been around that long ?

Cheers,
Simon

" Do you mean they dont use domain fbi.org - The rotters "

No ! they use Fake Boob Inspectors.com

That photo, http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p51819376.html , now I
think about it looks like part of Area 51 as it was back in the 50's.

Dont worry about the FBI,  but the MIB may pay a visit !

http://www.darkfacts.com/UFOs%20and%20Aliens/area51sign_Hazard_1.gif



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/18/AR2008021802230.html

In message 
, 
Dragon Heart  writes
>That photo, http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p51819376.html , now I
>think about it looks like part of Area 51 as it was back in the 50's.
>
>Dont worry about the FBI,  but the MIB may pay a visit !
>
>http://www.darkfacts.com/UFOs%20and%20Aliens/area51sign_Hazard_1.gif
>
>
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/18/AR200802
>1802230.html

ROTFL

Love it, love it, love it :-)))


-- 
Mike Hughes
A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton
at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England
Interested in American trains real and model?
Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/

In article ,
	Mike Hughes  writes:
> In message 
> , 
> Dragon Heart  writes
>>That photo, http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p51819376.html , now I
>>think about it looks like part of Area 51 as it was back in the 50's.
>>
>>Dont worry about the FBI,  but the MIB may pay a visit !
>>
>>http://www.darkfacts.com/UFOs%20and%20Aliens/area51sign_Hazard_1.gif
>>
>>
>>
>>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/18/AR200802
>>1802230.html
> 
> ROTFL
> 
> Love it, love it, love it :-)))

Obscurity via counter dis-information of the the dis-information.

Steve the Other 
--
Excuse me, I'll be right back.  I have to log onto a server in Romania 
and verify all of my EBay, PayPal, bank and Social Security information 
before they suspend my accounts.

Working the rockie road of the G&PX

Mike Hughes wrote:
> As most of the regular readers know I have been operating my fotopic site
> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/
> for just over 2 months.
> 
> As part of that site's facilities I get a weekly report on the top 
> visitors. Last week's highest had the highest number at 361 hits with 
> the next nearest being 97 hits - and the next highest were all about 
> that number.
> 
> What 'concerns' me <tongue slightly in cheek> is that the last part of 
> the top visitor's address is
> (first part removed..) washdc.east.verizon.net
> 
> Can someone shed any light on this address? Am I being monitored by some 
> secret agent in a deep, dark, recess in Washington DC because of the 
> caption I've put on Cliff's photo at
> http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/p51819376.html
> there have been over 1000 hits on this picture alone.
> 
> If there is someone who is genuinely interested in the photos please do 
> let me know and put me out of misery :-))
> 
> <ducks while others try to put me out of their misery>
> 
> <slinks away to fx of Paranoia by Black Sabbath at loud volume>
> 
Mike I am sure a number of nations have added your basement to their 
targeting computers!

Tony

On 1 Aug, 21:46, "simon"  wrote:
> "beamendsltd"  wrote in message
>
> news:8e5fc84f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com...
>
>
>
> > There are sites that can draw you a little map of where the
> > address resolves to physically, and who the IP blongs too if
> > you are really worried - but it's more likely that someone found
> > it funny as passed the link around the office or whatever (so
> > you only see their gateway IP address). If it were Uncle Sam
> > looking for some silo's they've lost, the IP would be fake
> > anyway......
>
> > Cheers
> > Richard
>
> > --
> >www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk      sa...@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
> >              I have become... comfortably numb
>
> Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the
> response get back to you ?
>
You set up the account then the fake IP address disappears after a few
days

Chris

"Dragon Heart"  wrote in message 
news:27fe3981-3a75-4fc5-ae2b-1b25685b76f2@56g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
On 1 Aug, 21:46, "simon"  wrote:
> "beamendsltd"  wrote in message
>
> news:8e5fc84f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com...
>
>
>
> > There are sites that can draw you a little map of where the
> > address resolves to physically, and who the IP blongs too if
> > you are really worried - but it's more likely that someone found
> > it funny as passed the link around the office or whatever (so
> > you only see their gateway IP address). If it were Uncle Sam
> > looking for some silo's they've lost, the IP would be fake
> > anyway......
>
> > Cheers
> > Richard
>
> > --
> >www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk sa...@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
> > I have become... comfortably numb
>
> Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the
> response get back to you ?
>
You set up the account then the fake IP address disappears after a few
days

Chris

Thats just a temporary account - its easier to use big ISP and get a dynamic 
address every time - thats anonymous to all except the ISP.
Fake should be something different.

Cheers,
Simon

In message 
, at 
14:52:51 on Mon, 4 Aug 2008, Dragon Heart  
remarked:
>> Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the
>> response get back to you ?
>>
>You set up the account then the fake IP address disappears after a few
>days

Disappears in what sense? Stops being announced by their upstream, gets 
de-registered by the LIR or RIR??
-- 
Roland Perry

In article <VrIEfFW9N$lIFASw@perry.co.uk>,
 Roland Perry  wrote:

> In message 
> , at 
> 14:52:51 on Mon, 4 Aug 2008, Dragon Heart  
> remarked:
> >> Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the
> >> response get back to you ?
> >>
> >You set up the account then the fake IP address disappears after a few
> >days
> 
> Disappears in what sense? Stops being announced by their upstream, gets 
> de-registered by the LIR or RIR??

Methinks someone upthread doesn't know what an IP address is.

Sam

In message 
          "simon"  wrote:

> 
> "beamendsltd"  wrote in message 
> news:8e5fc84f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com...
> >
> > There are sites that can draw you a little map of where the
> > address resolves to physically, and who the IP blongs too if
> > you are really worried - but it's more likely that someone found
> > it funny as passed the link around the office or whatever (so
> > you only see their gateway IP address). If it were Uncle Sam
> > looking for some silo's they've lost, the IP would be fake
> > anyway......
> >
> > Cheers
> > Richard
> >
> > -- 
> > www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk       sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
> >              I have become... comfortably numb
> 
> Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the 
> response get back to you ?
> 

When I post this, the IP address of my router with this machine tacked
on the end will be inserted into the header of the message. Also 
included will be the name corresponding to the textual address as found 
on a name server (akin to looking up someones postal address from their 
phone number in the phone book - the name is purely for us mortals use), 
so something like

123.456.789.012   scroggins.scroggins.com

If I were a spammer or didn't want to be traced for some reason
I could edit the message so those two would be purley fictitious.
You wouldn't be able to reply, but then that's the plan. The "internet"
never looks back to where a message came from unless it cannot be 
delivered, in which case it will wonder about a bit, find no valid
sender, and fade away. 

Often spammers will use someone else's valid address to make it look 
good (and, should someone look, by say "pinging" the address and getting a 
response, it may appear valid) - that's when you start getting thousands 
of replies to messages you never sent!

There's also other cunning plans that effectively pick a machine 
somewhere and use that ones IP instead, thus the connection between the
actual sender and the observed sender is pretty much untraceable but
the poor souls machine appears to the sender - and they get blacklisted!

> Cheers,
> Simon 
> 
> 

Cheers
Richard

-- 
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk       sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
              I have become... comfortably numb

In article <6351cca4f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com>,
 beamendsltd  wrote:

> In message 
>           "simon"  wrote:
> 
> > 
> > "beamendsltd"  wrote in message 
> > news:8e5fc84f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com...
> > >
> > > There are sites that can draw you a little map of where the
> > > address resolves to physically, and who the IP blongs too if
> > > you are really worried - but it's more likely that someone found
> > > it funny as passed the link around the office or whatever (so
> > > you only see their gateway IP address). If it were Uncle Sam
> > > looking for some silo's they've lost, the IP would be fake
> > > anyway......
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Richard
> > >
> > > -- 
> > > www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk       sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
> > >              I have become... comfortably numb
> > 
> > Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the 
> > response get back to you ?
> > 
> 
> When I post this, the IP address of my router with this machine tacked
> on the end will be inserted into the header of the message. ...

Nope.  Sometimes it is, sometimes not.  It's not in your message.

> ... Also 
> included will be the name corresponding to the textual address as found 
> on a name server (akin to looking up someones postal address from their 
> phone number in the phone book - the name is purely for us mortals use), 
> so something like
> 
> 123.456.789.012   scroggins.scroggins.com

Again, not necessarily.  And the DNS name is not purely for mortals to 
use.

> If I were a spammer or didn't want to be traced for some reason
> I could edit the message so those two would be purley fictitious.
> You wouldn't be able to reply, but then that's the plan. The "internet"
> never looks back to where a message came from unless it cannot be 
> delivered, in which case it will wonder about a bit, find no valid
> sender, and fade away. 

You're confusing the address and path that the message takes and the IP 
addresses that are used to transfer packets, and you're *really* 
confusing the different ways that email and newsgroup postings are 
transferred.

> Often spammers will use someone else's valid address to make it look 
> good (and, should someone look, by say "pinging" the address and getting a 
> response, it may appear valid) - that's when you start getting thousands 
> of replies to messages you never sent!

Spammers will fake email addresses and cause that kind of effect; they 
may also (to an extent) include fake IP addresses in message headers, 
but those are different from the addresses that are actually used to 
transfer the message.  "Pinging" (which has a number of more or less 
formal meanings) is irrelevant.

> There's also other cunning plans that effectively pick a machine 
> somewhere and use that ones IP instead, thus the connection between the
> actual sender and the observed sender is pretty much untraceable but
> the poor souls machine appears to the sender - and they get blacklisted!

Hardly ever useful and any reputable blacklist knows that.

Sam (with 20-odd years in networking)

In message 
          Sam Wilson  wrote:

> In article <6351cca4f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com>,
>  beamendsltd  wrote:
> 
> > In message 
> >           "simon"  wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > "beamendsltd"  wrote in message 
> > > news:8e5fc84f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com...
> > > >
> > > > There are sites that can draw you a little map of where the
> > > > address resolves to physically, and who the IP blongs too if
> > > > you are really worried - but it's more likely that someone found
> > > > it funny as passed the link around the office or whatever (so
> > > > you only see their gateway IP address). If it were Uncle Sam
> > > > looking for some silo's they've lost, the IP would be fake
> > > > anyway......
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > > Richard
> > > >
> > > > -- 
> > > > www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk       sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
> > > >              I have become... comfortably numb
> > > 
> > > Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the 
> > > response get back to you ?
> > > 
> > 
> > When I post this, the IP address of my router with this machine tacked
> > on the end will be inserted into the header of the message. ...
> 
> Nope.  Sometimes it is, sometimes not.  It's not in your message.
> 
> > ... Also 
> > included will be the name corresponding to the textual address as found 
> > on a name server (akin to looking up someones postal address from their 
> > phone number in the phone book - the name is purely for us mortals use), 
> > so something like
> > 
> > 123.456.789.012   scroggins.scroggins.com
> 
> Again, not necessarily.  And the DNS name is not purely for mortals to 
> use.
> 
> > If I were a spammer or didn't want to be traced for some reason
> > I could edit the message so those two would be purley fictitious.
> > You wouldn't be able to reply, but then that's the plan. The "internet"
> > never looks back to where a message came from unless it cannot be 
> > delivered, in which case it will wonder about a bit, find no valid
> > sender, and fade away. 
> 
> You're confusing the address and path that the message takes and the IP 
> addresses that are used to transfer packets, and you're *really* 
> confusing the different ways that email and newsgroup postings are 
> transferred.
> 
> > Often spammers will use someone else's valid address to make it look 
> > good (and, should someone look, by say "pinging" the address and getting a 
> > response, it may appear valid) - that's when you start getting thousands 
> > of replies to messages you never sent!
> 
> Spammers will fake email addresses and cause that kind of effect; they 
> may also (to an extent) include fake IP addresses in message headers, 
> but those are different from the addresses that are actually used to 
> transfer the message.  "Pinging" (which has a number of more or less 
> formal meanings) is irrelevant.
> 
> > There's also other cunning plans that effectively pick a machine 
> > somewhere and use that ones IP instead, thus the connection between the
> > actual sender and the observed sender is pretty much untraceable but
> > the poor souls machine appears to the sender - and they get blacklisted!
> 
> Hardly ever useful and any reputable blacklist knows that.
> 
> Sam (with 20-odd years in networking)

I was simply trying to explain it in simple terms.

Cheers
Richard BSc Hons Comp. Sci

-- 
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk       sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
              I have become... comfortably numb

In article <511222ca4f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com>,
 beamendsltd  wrote:

> I was simply trying to explain it in simple terms.

At the risk of sounding totally patronising (oy, you at the back, 
quiet!) when you want to try to explain something simply it's best to 
choose your examples so that you don't have to retract them later.

I'm sure most of us remember parents or teachers telling us things that 
later turned out not to be true.

Sam

In article <511222ca4f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com>,
	beamendsltd  writes:
> In message 
>           Sam Wilson  wrote:
> 
>> In article <6351cca4f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com>,
>>  beamendsltd  wrote:
>> 
>> > In message 
>> >           "simon"  wrote:
>> > 
>> > > 
>> > > "beamendsltd"  wrote in message 
>> > > news:8e5fc84f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com...
>> > > >
>> > > > There are sites that can draw you a little map of where the
>> > > > address resolves to physically, and who the IP blongs too if
>> > > > you are really worried - but it's more likely that someone found
>> > > > it funny as passed the link around the office or whatever (so
>> > > > you only see their gateway IP address). If it were Uncle Sam
>> > > > looking for some silo's they've lost, the IP would be fake
>> > > > anyway......
>> > > >
>> > > > Cheers
>> > > > Richard
>> > > >
>> > > > -- 
>> > > > www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk       sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
>> > > >              I have become... comfortably numb
>> > > 
>> > > Always been a mystery to me, if you have a fake IP address how does the 
>> > > response get back to you ?
>> > > 
>> > 
>> > When I post this, the IP address of my router with this machine tacked
>> > on the end will be inserted into the header of the message. ...
>> 
>> Nope.  Sometimes it is, sometimes not.  It's not in your message.
>> 
>> > ... Also 
>> > included will be the name corresponding to the textual address as found 
>> > on a name server (akin to looking up someones postal address from their 
>> > phone number in the phone book - the name is purely for us mortals use), 
>> > so something like
>> > 
>> > 123.456.789.012   scroggins.scroggins.com
>> 
>> Again, not necessarily.  And the DNS name is not purely for mortals to 
>> use.
>> 
>> > If I were a spammer or didn't want to be traced for some reason
>> > I could edit the message so those two would be purley fictitious.
>> > You wouldn't be able to reply, but then that's the plan. The "internet"
>> > never looks back to where a message came from unless it cannot be 
>> > delivered, in which case it will wonder about a bit, find no valid
>> > sender, and fade away. 
>> 
>> You're confusing the address and path that the message takes and the IP 
>> addresses that are used to transfer packets, and you're *really* 
>> confusing the different ways that email and newsgroup postings are 
>> transferred.
>> 
>> > Often spammers will use someone else's valid address to make it look 
>> > good (and, should someone look, by say "pinging" the address and getting a 
>> > response, it may appear valid) - that's when you start getting thousands 
>> > of replies to messages you never sent!
>> 
>> Spammers will fake email addresses and cause that kind of effect; they 
>> may also (to an extent) include fake IP addresses in message headers, 
>> but those are different from the addresses that are actually used to 
>> transfer the message.  "Pinging" (which has a number of more or less 
>> formal meanings) is irrelevant.
>> 
>> > There's also other cunning plans that effectively pick a machine 
>> > somewhere and use that ones IP instead, thus the connection between the
>> > actual sender and the observed sender is pretty much untraceable but
>> > the poor souls machine appears to the sender - and they get blacklisted!
>> 
>> Hardly ever useful and any reputable blacklist knows that.
>> 
>> Sam (with 20-odd years in networking)
> 
> I was simply trying to explain it in simple terms.
> 
> Cheers
> Richard BSc Hons Comp. Sci
> 

You are confusing the envelope and the header.

If A wants to send a message to C but, C is blocking A then A can put a return-path to C in the 
message and send the message to B.  If B's MTA is poorly configured it might accept the message 
but, if it is configured sensibly it will bounce the message to C.  It's called backscatter.

A well configured MTA will not accept mail from a bogus address.  A well configured MTA will only
accept from an address which resolves both forward and reverse DNS.

There is nothing particularly simple about the e-mail protocols.  If you spend time looking though
them you will probably be amazed that it works at all.

Paul
--
Excuse me, I'll be right back.  I have to log onto a server in Romania 
and verify all of my EBay, PayPal, bank and Social Security information 
before they suspend my accounts.

Working the rockie road of the G&PX

In article ,
 newhouse@bigbox.wan.vpn (Paul Newhouse) wrote:

> You are confusing the envelope and the header.

No.  The original stuff was about faking an IP address.  They're not 
generally in the envelope and the ones in the message header can't 
sensibly be faked.  He's confusing IP addresses with email addresses.  
He then talks about the IP address of his router being included in his 
posting.  It's not.

> If A wants to send a message to C but, C is blocking A then A can put a 
> return-path to C in the 
> message and send the message to B.  If B's MTA is poorly configured it might 
> accept the message 
> but, if it is configured sensibly it will bounce the message to C.  It's 
> called backscatter.

... and the example he uses is in a news posting which has nothing to do 
with MTAs.

> A well configured MTA will not accept mail from a bogus address.  A well 
> configured MTA will only
> accept from an address which resolves both forward and reverse DNS.
> 
> There is nothing particularly simple about the e-mail protocols.  If you 
> spend time looking though
> them you will probably be amazed that it works at all.

I'm biting back a comment about how easily confused you must be.... :-)

Sam

"Sam Wilson"  wrote in message 
news:Sam.Wilson-8CC115.18335905082008@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
> In article ,
> newhouse@bigbox.wan.vpn (Paul Newhouse) wrote:
>
>> You are confusing the envelope and the header.
>
> No.  The original stuff was about faking an IP address.  They're not
> generally in the envelope and the ones in the message header can't
> sensibly be faked.  He's confusing IP addresses with email addresses.
> He then talks about the IP address of his router being included in his
> posting.  It's not.
>
>> If A wants to send a message to C but, C is blocking A then A can put a
>> return-path to C in the
>> message and send the message to B.  If B's MTA is poorly configured it 
>> might
>> accept the message
>> but, if it is configured sensibly it will bounce the message to C.  It's
>> called backscatter.
>
> ... and the example he uses is in a news posting which has nothing to do
> with MTAs.
>
>> A well configured MTA will not accept mail from a bogus address.  A well
>> configured MTA will only
>> accept from an address which resolves both forward and reverse DNS.
>>
>> There is nothing particularly simple about the e-mail protocols.  If you
>> spend time looking though
>> them you will probably be amazed that it works at all.

Are you referring to sendmail - esp the rules. Havent looked for a while 
(maybe version 10) but they were fun. Gave up very quickly and passed it on 
to a willling person with a sick mind.

>
> I'm biting back a comment about how easily confused you must be.... :-)
>
> Sam

I've had to dabble with TCP networking over the years but as a secondary 
task so understood what had to..
Apps like smtp require a conversation, so if you send an 'open' with a fake 
ip address (using IP routing) then the reply to that 'open' will not reach 
the originator.
That is if I've understood something correctly, hence the question of how 
can you use a fake ip address ?

Cheers,
Simon

On Aug 5, 10:11 pm, "simon"  wrote:
> "Sam Wilson"  wrote in message
>
> news:Sam.Wilson-8CC115.18335905082008@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article ,
> > newho...@bigbox.wan.vpn (Paul Newhouse) wrote:
>
> >> You are confusing the envelope and the header.
>
> > No.  The original stuff was about faking an IP address.  They're not
> > generally in the envelope and the ones in the message header can't
> > sensibly be faked.  He's confusing IP addresses with email addresses.
> > He then talks about the IP address of his router being included in his
> > posting.  It's not.
>
> >> If A wants to send a message to C but, C is blocking A then A can put a
> >> return-path to C in the
> >> message and send the message to B.  If B's MTA is poorly configured it
> >> might
> >> accept the message
> >> but, if it is configured sensibly it will bounce the message to C.  It's
> >> called backscatter.
>
> > ... and the example he uses is in a news posting which has nothing to do
> > with MTAs.
>
> >> A well configured MTA will not accept mail from a bogus address.  A well
> >> configured MTA will only
> >> accept from an address which resolves both forward and reverse DNS.
>
> >> There is nothing particularly simple about the e-mail protocols.  If you
> >> spend time looking though
> >> them you will probably be amazed that it works at all.
>
> Are you referring to sendmail - esp the rules. Havent looked for a while
> (maybe version 10) but they were fun. Gave up very quickly and passed it on
> to a willling person with a sick mind.
>
>
>
> > I'm biting back a comment about how easily confused you must be.... :-)
>
> > Sam
>
> I've had to dabble with TCP networking over the years but as a secondary
> task so understood what had to..
> Apps like smtp require a conversation, so if you send an 'open' with a fake
> ip address (using IP routing) then the reply to that 'open' will not reach
> the originator.
> That is if I've understood something correctly, hence the question of how
> can you use a fake ip address ?
>
> Cheers,
> Simon- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

?????

You were saying what about the oujamathingy now?

Serves me right for not being quiet at the back... once again, I'll
get me coat...

On Aug 5, 10:11 pm, "simon"  wrote:
> "Sam Wilson"  wrote in message
>
> news:Sam.Wilson-8CC115.18335905082008@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article ,
> > newho...@bigbox.wan.vpn (Paul Newhouse) wrote:
>
> >> You are confusing the envelope and the header.
>
> > No.  The original stuff was about faking an IP address.  They're not
> > generally in the envelope and the ones in the message header can't
> > sensibly be faked.  He's confusing IP addresses with email addresses.
> > He then talks about the IP address of his router being included in his
> > posting.  It's not.
>
> >> If A wants to send a message to C but, C is blocking A then A can put a
> >> return-path to C in the
> >> message and send the message to B.  If B's MTA is poorly configured it
> >> might
> >> accept the message
> >> but, if it is configured sensibly it will bounce the message to C.  It's
> >> called backscatter.
>
> > ... and the example he uses is in a news posting which has nothing to do
> > with MTAs.
>
> >> A well configured MTA will not accept mail from a bogus address.  A well
> >> configured MTA will only
> >> accept from an address which resolves both forward and reverse DNS.
>
> >> There is nothing particularly simple about the e-mail protocols.  If you
> >> spend time looking though
> >> them you will probably be amazed that it works at all.
>
> Are you referring to sendmail - esp the rules. Havent looked for a while
> (maybe version 10) but they were fun. Gave up very quickly and passed it on
> to a willling person with a sick mind.
>
>
>
> > I'm biting back a comment about how easily confused you must be.... :-)
>
> > Sam
>
> I've had to dabble with TCP networking over the years but as a secondary
> task so understood what had to..
> Apps like smtp require a conversation, so if you send an 'open' with a fake
> ip address (using IP routing) then the reply to that 'open' will not reach
> the originator.
> That is if I've understood something correctly, hence the question of how
> can you use a fake ip address ?
>
> Cheers,
> Simon- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

?????

You said what about the oujamathingy now?

serves me right, I knew I should have been quiet at the back...

Excuse me. I am confused. Is this a model railroad post?

"Sam Wilson"  wrote in message 
news:Sam.Wilson-8CC115.18335905082008@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
> In article ,
> newhouse@bigbox.wan.vpn (Paul Newhouse) wrote:
>
>> You are confusing the envelope and the header.
>
> No.  The original stuff was about faking an IP address.  They're not
> generally in the envelope and the ones in the message header can't
> sensibly be faked.  He's confusing IP addresses with email addresses.
> He then talks about the IP address of his router being included in his
> posting.  It's not.
>
>> If A wants to send a message to C but, C is blocking A then A can put a
>> return-path to C in the
>> message and send the message to B.  If B's MTA is poorly configured it 
>> might
>> accept the message
>> but, if it is configured sensibly it will bounce the message to C.  It's
>> called backscatter.
>
> ... and the example he uses is in a news posting which has nothing to do
> with MTAs.
>
>> A well configured MTA will not accept mail from a bogus address.  A well
>> configured MTA will only
>> accept from an address which resolves both forward and reverse DNS.
>>
>> There is nothing particularly simple about the e-mail protocols.  If you
>> spend time looking though
>> them you will probably be amazed that it works at all.
>
> I'm biting back a comment about how easily confused you must be.... :-)
>
> Sam
>

"Crest Hill, Illinois"  wrote in message 
news:Uu-dnSEYrrqCTwXVnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@comcast.com...
> Excuse me. I am confused. Is this a model railroad post?
>
> "Sam Wilson"  wrote in message 
> news:Sam.Wilson-8CC115.18335905082008@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
>> In article ,
>> newhouse@bigbox.wan.vpn (Paul Newhouse) wrote:
>>
>>> You are confusing the envelope and the header.
>>
>> No.  The original stuff was about faking an IP address.  They're not
>> generally in the envelope and the ones in the message header can't
>> sensibly be faked.  He's confusing IP addresses with email addresses.
>> He then talks about the IP address of his router being included in his
>> posting.  It's not.
>>
>>> If A wants to send a message to C but, C is blocking A then A can put a
>>> return-path to C in the
>>> message and send the message to B.  If B's MTA is poorly configured it 
>>> might
>>> accept the message
>>> but, if it is configured sensibly it will bounce the message to C.  It's
>>> called backscatter.
>>
>> ... and the example he uses is in a news posting which has nothing to do
>> with MTAs.
>>
>>> A well configured MTA will not accept mail from a bogus address.  A well
>>> configured MTA will only
>>> accept from an address which resolves both forward and reverse DNS.
>>>
>>> There is nothing particularly simple about the e-mail protocols.  If you
>>> spend time looking though
>>> them you will probably be amazed that it works at all.
>>
>> I'm biting back a comment about how easily confused you must be.... :-)
>>
>> Sam
>>
>
Nope. But at least its associated with newsgroup posts and demonstrates the 
wonder of the internet where you can learn so much.
By the way this is an example of a bottom post.
:-)

Cheers,
Simon

"darkprince66"  wrote in message 
news:3cba3eee-5c46-4dd1-bdcd-ccf2ba10971b@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 5, 10:11 pm, "simon"  wrote:
> "Sam Wilson"  wrote in message
>
>
> I've had to dabble with TCP networking over the years but as a secondary
> task so understood what had to..
> Apps like smtp require a conversation, so if you send an 'open' with a 
> fake
> ip address (using IP routing) then the reply to that 'open' will not reach
> the originator.
> That is if I've understood something correctly, hence the question of how
> can you use a fake ip address ?
>
> Cheers,
> Simon- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

>?????
>
>You said what about the oujamathingy now?
>
>serves me right, I knew I should have been quiet at the back...

Dont know what youre complaining about, have kept it simple in the hope of 
getting a simple reply.

Cheers,
Simon

On Aug 5, 11:36 pm, "simon"  wrote:
> "darkprince66"  wrote in message
>
> news:3cba3eee-5c46-4dd1-bdcd-ccf2ba10971b@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 5, 10:11 pm, "simon"  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Sam Wilson"  wrote in message
>
> > I've had to dabble with TCP networking over the years but as a secondary
> > task so understood what had to..
> > Apps like smtp require a conversation, so if you send an 'open' with a
> > fake
> > ip address (using IP routing) then the reply to that 'open' will not reach
> > the originator.
> > That is if I've understood something correctly, hence the question of how
> > can you use a fake ip address ?
>
> > Cheers,
> > Simon- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
> >?????
>
> >You said what about the oujamathingy now?
>
> >serves me right, I knew I should have been quiet at the back...
>
> Dont know what youre complaining about, have kept it simple in the hope of
> getting a simple reply.
>
> Cheers,
> Simon- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

No complaints, merely confusion. I have to be honest here... I don't
have the faintest clue what you are talking about! ;-)))

Tecky stuff was never my thing???

This is an example of a top post.

"simon"  wrote in message 
news:b5ydnbno8uW3SAXVnZ2dnUVZ8vednZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "Crest Hill, Illinois"  wrote in message 
> news:Uu-dnSEYrrqCTwXVnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@comcast.com...
>> Excuse me. I am confused. Is this a model railroad post?
>>
>> "Sam Wilson"  wrote in message 
>> news:Sam.Wilson-8CC115.18335905082008@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
>>> In article ,
>>> newhouse@bigbox.wan.vpn (Paul Newhouse) wrote:
>>>
>>>> You are confusing the envelope and the header.
>>>
>>> No.  The original stuff was about faking an IP address.  They're not
>>> generally in the envelope and the ones in the message header can't
>>> sensibly be faked.  He's confusing IP addresses with email addresses.
>>> He then talks about the IP address of his router being included in his
>>> posting.  It's not.
>>>
>>>> If A wants to send a message to C but, C is blocking A then A can put a
>>>> return-path to C in the
>>>> message and send the message to B.  If B's MTA is poorly configured it 
>>>> might
>>>> accept the message
>>>> but, if it is configured sensibly it will bounce the message to C. 
>>>> It's
>>>> called backscatter.
>>>
>>> ... and the example he uses is in a news posting which has nothing to do
>>> with MTAs.
>>>
>>>> A well configured MTA will not accept mail from a bogus address.  A 
>>>> well
>>>> configured MTA will only
>>>> accept from an address which resolves both forward and reverse DNS.
>>>>
>>>> There is nothing particularly simple about the e-mail protocols.  If 
>>>> you
>>>> spend time looking though
>>>> them you will probably be amazed that it works at all.
>>>
>>> I'm biting back a comment about how easily confused you must be.... :-)
>>>
>>> Sam
>>>
>>
> Nope. But at least its associated with newsgroup posts and demonstrates 
> the wonder of the internet where you can learn so much.
> By the way this is an example of a bottom post.
> :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Simon
>
>

On Aug 5, 4:37 pm, "Crest Hill, Illinois" 
wrote:

> This is an example of a top post.

Not to mention bad manners.

Crest Hill, Illinois wrote:

> This is an example of a top post.

Not really. It's a fairly mundane one.
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p13857132.html
(33 034 at London Waterloo, Sep 1979)

In article ,
 "simon"  wrote:

> "Sam Wilson"  wrote in message 
> news:Sam.Wilson-8CC115.18335905082008@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
> > In article ,
> > newhouse@bigbox.wan.vpn (Paul Newhouse) wrote:
> >
> >> There is nothing particularly simple about the e-mail protocols.  If you
> >> spend time looking though
> >> them you will probably be amazed that it works at all.
> 
> Are you referring to sendmail - esp the rules. Havent looked for a while 
> (maybe version 10) but they were fun. Gave up very quickly and passed it on 
> to a willling person with a sick mind.

I'd forgotten about sendmail.cf.  If he's getting *that* confused with 
faking IP addresses then he really needs help.

> > I'm biting back a comment about how easily confused you must be.... :-)
> 
> I've had to dabble with TCP networking over the years but as a secondary 
> task so understood what had to..
> Apps like smtp require a conversation, so if you send an 'open' with a fake 
> ip address (using IP routing) then the reply to that 'open' will not reach 
> the originator.
> That is if I've understood something correctly, hence the question of how 
> can you use a fake ip address ?

Yep - I forgot to add that he was also confusing the characteristics of 
TCP and UDP.  In certain circumstances it used to be possible to confuse 
TCP connections (see Kevin Mitnick for details) but modern systems are 
immune to that kind of thing.  Not so for UDP, and that's a current 
problem with the Kaminsky cache poisoning threat.

But this is so far off topic that it might even be interesting to some 
people.


Sam

"Chris Tolley"  wrote in message 
news:ql0qp4yutuye$.7d50ps0y0fia.dlg@40tude.net...
> Crest Hill, Illinois wrote:
>
>> This is an example of a top post.
>
> Not really. It's a fairly mundane one.
> -- 
> http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p13857132.html
> (33 034 at London Waterloo, Sep 1979)
>
Mundane would not be in Florida where Piers Anthony lives.

In message 
          Sam Wilson  wrote:

> In article <511222ca4f%beamendsltd@btconnect.com>,
>  beamendsltd  wrote:
> 
> > I was simply trying to explain it in simple terms.
> 
> At the risk of sounding totally patronising (oy, you at the back, 
> quiet!) when you want to try to explain something simply it's best to 
> choose your examples so that you don't have to retract them later.
> 
> I'm sure most of us remember parents or teachers telling us things that 
> later turned out not to be true.
> 

And experts too!

> Sam


Cheers
Richard

-- 
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk       sales@beamends-lrspares.co.uk
              I have become... comfortably numb

"Crest Hill, Illinois"  wrote in message 
news:vrednU86NO6qeQXVnZ2dnUVZ_qvinZ2d@comcast.com...
> This is an example of a top post.
>
Oh dear, does that mean you are aware of the convention ?

Cheers,
Simon

"Sam Wilson"  wrote in message 
news:Sam.Wilson-5C2DE6.13591906082008@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
> In article ,
> "simon"  wrote:
>
>> "Sam Wilson"  wrote in message
>> news:Sam.Wilson-8CC115.18335905082008@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
>> > In article ,
>> > newhouse@bigbox.wan.vpn (Paul Newhouse) wrote:
>> >
>> >> There is nothing particularly simple about the e-mail protocols.  If 
>> >> you
>> >> spend time looking though
>> >> them you will probably be amazed that it works at all.
>>
>> Are you referring to sendmail - esp the rules. Havent looked for a while
>> (maybe version 10) but they were fun. Gave up very quickly and passed it 
>> on
>> to a willling person with a sick mind.
>
> I'd forgotten about sendmail.cf.  If he's getting *that* confused with
> faking IP addresses then he really needs help.
>
>> > I'm biting back a comment about how easily confused you must be.... :-)
>>
>> I've had to dabble with TCP networking over the years but as a secondary
>> task so understood what had to..
>> Apps like smtp require a conversation, so if you send an 'open' with a 
>> fake
>> ip address (using IP routing) then the reply to that 'open' will not 
>> reach
>> the originator.
>> That is if I've understood something correctly, hence the question of how
>> can you use a fake ip address ?
>
> Yep - I forgot to add that he was also confusing the characteristics of
> TCP and UDP.  In certain circumstances it used to be possible to confuse
> TCP connections (see Kevin Mitnick for details) but modern systems are
> immune to that kind of thing.  Not so for UDP, and that's a current
> problem with the Kaminsky cache poisoning threat.
>
> But this is so far off topic that it might even be interesting to some
> people.
>
>
> Sam

Seen the start of what appears to be another trap. Mails saying the latest 
update of pdf or iexplore available now. Connect to dodgy link to download.

Cheers,
Simon

"simon"  wrote in message 
news:xd-dnfsrMtmXkgfVRVnyhgA@bt.com...
>
> "Crest Hill, Illinois"  wrote in message 
> news:vrednU86NO6qeQXVnZ2dnUVZ_qvinZ2d@comcast.com...
>> This is an example of a top post.
>>
> Oh dear, does that mean you are aware of the convention ?
>
> Cheers,
> Simon
>
>

It all depends on where I am posting. I have two other newsgroups that 
scream bloody murder if I post at the bottom. EXCUSE ME IF I FORGOT WHERE I 
WAS AT.

"Crest Hill, Illinois"  wrote in message 
news:5uCdnZiNqqDghAfVnZ2dnUVZ_tHinZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "simon"  wrote in message 
> news:xd-dnfsrMtmXkgfVRVnyhgA@bt.com...
>>
>> "Crest Hill, Illinois"  wrote in message 
>> news:vrednU86NO6qeQXVnZ2dnUVZ_qvinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> This is an example of a top post.
>>>
>> Oh dear, does that mean you are aware of the convention ?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Simon
>>
>>
>
> It all depends on where I am posting. I have two other newsgroups that 
> scream bloody murder if I post at the bottom. EXCUSE ME IF I FORGOT WHERE 
> I WAS AT.
>
Do try not to shout, theres no need - esp on uk.rec.models.rail. May I ask 
why you dont do it for all groups, they all have the same convention ?

Cheers,
Simon

[ groups cut ]

"simon"  wrote in message 
news:lt-dnSuafoPevwfVnZ2dnUVZ8trinZ2d@bt.com...
>
[ in reply to "Crest Hill, Illinois" ]

<snipped>

Please don't feed the zoo animals.

"simon"  wrote in message 
news:lt-dnSuafoPevwfVnZ2dnUVZ8trinZ2d@bt.com...
>
> "Crest Hill, Illinois"  wrote in message 
> news:5uCdnZiNqqDghAfVnZ2dnUVZ_tHinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
>> "simon"  wrote in message 
>> news:xd-dnfsrMtmXkgfVRVnyhgA@bt.com...
>>>
>>> "Crest Hill, Illinois"  wrote in message 
>>> news:vrednU86NO6qeQXVnZ2dnUVZ_qvinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>> This is an example of a top post.
>>>>
>>> Oh dear, does that mean you are aware of the convention ?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Simon
>>>
>>>
>>
>> It all depends on where I am posting. I have two other newsgroups that 
>> scream bloody murder if I post at the bottom. EXCUSE ME IF I FORGOT WHERE 
>> I WAS AT.
>>
> Do try not to shout, theres no need - esp on uk.rec.models.rail. May I ask 
> why you dont do it for all groups, they all have the same convention ?
>
> Cheers,
> Simon
>
>
All other groups that I converse in post at the top.

On 8/6/2008 4:34 PM Crest Hill, Illinois spake thus:

> "simon"  wrote in message 
> news:lt-dnSuafoPevwfVnZ2dnUVZ8trinZ2d@bt.com...
>>
>> "Crest Hill, Illinois"  wrote in message 
>> news:5uCdnZiNqqDghAfVnZ2dnUVZ_tHinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>
>>> "simon"  wrote in message 
>>> news:xd-dnfsrMtmXkgfVRVnyhgA@bt.com...
>>>>
>>>> "Crest Hill, Illinois"  wrote in message 
>>>> news:vrednU86NO6qeQXVnZ2dnUVZ_qvinZ2d@comcast.com...
 >>>>
>>>>> This is an example of a top post.
>>>>>
>>>> Oh dear, does that mean you are aware of the convention ?
>>>
>>> It all depends on where I am posting. I have two other newsgroups that 
>>> scream bloody murder if I post at the bottom. EXCUSE ME IF I FORGOT WHERE 
>>> I WAS AT.
>>>
>> Do try not to shout, theres no need - esp on uk.rec.models.rail. May I ask 
>> why you dont do it for all groups, they all have the same convention ?
>>
> All other groups that I converse in post at the top.

Let me guess: those are Micro$oft newsfroups?


-- 
"Wikipedia ... it reminds me ... of dogs barking idiotically through
endless nights. It is so bad that a sort of grandeur creeps into it.
It drags itself out of the dark abyss of pish, and crawls insanely up
the topmost pinnacle of posh. It is rumble and bumble. It is flap and
doodle. It is balder and dash."

- With apologies to H. L. Mencken