ttauber at bbnplanet.com
Sun Jan 17 18:52:10 UTC 1999
On Jan 16, 3:04pm, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> Subject: Re: source filtering
> On Wed, Jan 13, 1999 at 10:37:55PM -0500, Tony Tauber wrote:
> > On Jan 13, 3:41pm, Scott McGrath wrote:
> > > Subject: RE: source filtering
> > > GTE and ATT both filter via access lists on the customers CPE routers IF
> > > they provide the routers to the customer
> > It'd be nice if this information came from one of the entities
> > named above. Here's a refinement for our part.
> > GTE does not impose mandatory source address filtering via
> > access-lists on customers' CPE routers. However, we have recently
> > implemented Cisco's "ip verify unicast reverse-path".
> I think perhaps we have an acronym collision here. I read Scott's
> comment to mean "Customer Premises Equipment", since that was the only
> parsing that didn't introduce a conflict.
> However, I read Tony's reply as "Customer Provided Equipment", since
> that's my usual parsing of that acronym.
> In this case, it makes quite a difference. Clarification?
> Better: why not, Tony?
My meaning, and the one in common use around GTE Internetworking,
is "Customer Premises Equipment" which can be supplied by us or
the customer. The phrase "customers' CPE" above, would probably
have been a tad clearer as just "CPE", especially since most
CPE that we manage are in fact supplied and owned by us. Many
customers choose to supply and manage their own CPE which means
filtering or lack thereof is up to them.
More information about the NANOG