|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: net.terrorism
On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, John Belcher wrote: > Sabri, did you not understand this... I am far from perfect. > > Announcing a netblock doesn't promise that every address in that block > > exists or is reachable. A network that is blocked for AUP violations > > doesn't "exist", and usually returns the ICMP message "Unreachable -- > > Administratively Prohibited" specifically designed for such situations. > > Have you read "Router Requirements"? > It specifically states that a block can be announced but that does not > guarantee that all hosts will be reachable. You buy transit from abovenet, > the block in question goes against their AUP, live with it. I can live with the fact that they don't route that traffic. But they should not tell me that they will... > And furthermore, how can you even begin to take part in this > conversation if you haven't read all the relevant literature? Forgive my arrogancy but I don't need "relevant literature" for an ethical question like this. > I also strongly suggest you think twice before you accuse a company of > "terrorism" in the future. What would you call it then? -- /* Sabri Berisha, non-interesting network dude. * * CCNA, BOFH, Systems admin Linux/FreeBSD */
|