Automatic filtering - CISCO, you should think about this...

Phil Howard phil at
Mon Dec 29 14:24:49 UTC 1997

Alex P. Rudnev writes...

> > How about having "no-auto-inbound-filter" instead, making the default in
> all
> > new versions of IOS be to run this essential level of protection, providing
> > a means to turn it off only for those who know they need to turn it off.
> It was proposed to CISCO about 1 year ago. But I have head they are doing 
> something about this (through it's in private talks only).

Once the appropriate management decides that a feature like this is a top
priority, Cisco surely has the resources to get it implemented into IOS
code, and tested, in perhaps 3 months and no less than 6 months.  They
clearly have other priorities.  We need to push this one ahead, to the top.
I'd even settle for having the function w/o a way to turn it off as an
interim if the holdup is deciding how to make it configurable.

We should all ask our Cisco sales people if "default auto-inbound-filter"
will be in all shipped IOS versions by, say, 2Q98.  If they can't say "yes"
then grill 'em and leave the impression you'll be looking at other products
in 2Q98.

And if you have Ascend sales people calling, ask 'em the same thing.  Same
for anyone else.  For example I have a 3com salesman constantly checking up
on how happy I am with my Ascend MAX's.  I know what I'll be asking him on
his next phone call.

Phil Howard | end1it83 at stop8ads at crash161 at
  phil      | die0spam at die4spam at ads8suck at
    at      | suck7it1 at crash118 at stop4578 at
  milepost  | suck2it8 at crash333 at stop2498 at
    dot     | ads1suck at no5way77 at end9ads3 at
  com       | no1spam2 at stop2410 at ads2suck at

More information about the NANOG mailing list