|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks
That's been my entire point. Network operators who properly SWIP don't get credit for going through the legwork by other networks that apply quasi-arbitrary bit masks to their blocks. As I said before, if you're going to block a /24, why not do it right and block *all* the IPs in their ASN? My DSL and cable modem subscribers are spread across a dozen non-contiguous /24s. If the bothered network is upset with one of my cable modem subs and blocks just one /24 they will open themselves up when that CPE obtains a new IP in a different /24. Frank -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Pete Templin Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 3:42 PM To: Chris Owen Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Chris Owen wrote: > Well, "well managed" to me would mean that allocations from that /20 > were SWIPed or a rwhois server was running so that if any of those 4,000 > IP addresses does something bad you don't get caught in the middle. Due diligence with SWIP/rwhois only means that one customer is well documented apart from another. As this thread has highlighted, some people filter/block based on random variables: the covering /24, the covering aggregate announcement, and/or arbitrary bit lengths. If a particular server is within the scope of what someone decides to filter/block, it gets filtered or blocked. Good SWIPs/rwhois entries don't mean jack to those admins. pt
|