|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: BCP38 dismissal
> > i suggest you go back to the mail to which you responded obscenely > > vilifying the poster who was specifically saying he worried about his > > host before bcp38. that was specifically the subject. > > "host" in that context was his router, which makes your comment make > less sense. (having never seen a big iron router become a client in a > botnet, myself) He was talking about big iron control plane policy > controls. You must have missed the context. Actually, Randy is right. We were discussing in context of routers and botnets themselves. "Host" in my context was about the botnets sending attack from legitimate IP sources that BCP38 will not be able to defeat. > You want to stop being rude, and start making positive assertations > about things you know? I'd love to be wrong, but I've got a whole lot > of experience on this topic. If you know better, educate the rest of > us. No, you have demonstrated that the only jerk in this entire forum is no one but you with limited bounds of intelligence. Before you go on and call someone a "jerk", "idiot" and falsely accuse him of ~not wanting to deploy BCP38[1]~, read your own posts and start making positive assertions about things that you know yourself. [1]: Almost every network that I help manage is operated with BCP38 either with uRPF or even with automatic-scripted SAV (source address verification/filtering)/ ACL's. james
|