|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: uRPF Loose Check Mode vs. ACL
On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 12:50:53AM -0400, [email protected] wrote: > On Sun, 05 May 2002 22:11:12 EDT, Richard A Steenbergen said: > > What we all really need is a protocol which can distribute filtering > > information network-wide. Go make one. :) > > No, what we need is a protocol that can do *secured* distribution of > filtering info net-wide. Otherwise, some bozo is going to accidentally > inject a flter for 127/8, causing as much fun as the announcement of same > a few years ago. And I'm *sure* there's at least a few people on this > list that would be *very* tempted to inject filters for RFC1918 space > for the benefit of those providers that don't egress filter it currently ;) Nononono, by network-wide I ment *MY* network not the Internet. :) Though I really wouldn't mind seeing a well known community for "nexthop null0". How can people sit around pontificating on useless features for useless protocols all day long, and yet not do this? BTW, I don't know what announcing 127/8 would break since that should never leave or enter any systems, and I still take issue with the need to filter 1918 packets. -- Richard A Steenbergen <[email protected]> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)
|