Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations
avg at sprint.net
Sat Jan 27 07:15:03 UTC 1996
Forrest W. Christian <forrestc at imach.com> wrote:
>Is there some other method which would be as effective to destroy a
>specific net's connectivity to the majority of the net? A few come to
>mind right now:
> 1) ip route <luser's address & mask> null0
Deliberate injection of bogus routes is the reason sufficient
to disconnect from the provider who's doing that completely.
*No* serious ISP will ever want to unleash the routing wars.
> 2) ip filtering:
> - Probably uses more CPU than #1, but doesn't screw
> with the routing tables.
You may want to ask Sean to send you a copy of SL-MAE-E's configuration.
There already are *huge* filter lists, just to maintain sanity of
>I doubt you're going to need to add many filters :)
Heh. Never underestimate the laziness (overworkiness, underpaidness,
or just plain cluelessness) of netadmins.
Seriously, there are people which still believe that CIDR is a
>As far as who will run the programs to check for this, I'm sure that a
>suitable home for the tools necessary could be found.
It is not the tools, it is the politics. Getting rid of nukes
completely is a nice goal. Does anybody seriously think it can
be done today? Not until we see the last of Kings and Presidents
(not mentioning Senators and other Servants of the people).
A net.politzai is a very unrewarding role, potentially leading
to real lawsuits. Passive filtering with well-announced policy
at least gives no food for lawyers. Sprint's policies are
a result of extensive consultations between engineering, marketing
and legal people (and activist customers), and is a way for Sprint
to protect its own network from the routing collapse.
Not speaking for Sprint.
More information about the NANOG