Re: hostmangling in new ircd
Andy Smith <[email protected]> Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:27:52 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.irc.blitzed.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 09:47:54AM +1000, Andryan Gunawan wrote: > On 8/25/05, David Leadbeater <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 24 Aug 2005, at 11:01, Andy Smith wrote: > > > If the mask were converted from base 16 to base 36 then it would be > > > smaller. 4 characters instead of 8. IPs would be 17 characters > > > long instead of 29. Worth it? > > > > I think so, I'd rather the host was a short as possible so the mangled > > hosts don't look too ugly. > > > > Maybe we could take the vowels out (or at least 4 of them - if my maths > > is correct) so the resulting hosts look less like words (in English > > anyway..). > > How do ops ban users from certain ISP if they can't see a pattern to ban on? What is the problem with banning *.some.isp.com when you see blitzed-w52g1.some.isp.com? _______________________________________________ public mailing list public-Hb7ITwsGSD4lroQnaJEqWdi2O/[email protected] http://lists.blitzed.org/listinfo/public
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 189 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDDY8YIJm2TL8VSQsRAsIKAJ9DdNgWLBn01fD+2lBpQOwx0CAOVACdE1y9 OMHJ+2QOTY9rEzzEYxWPPh8= =brBh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----