net.terrorism
Sabri Berisha
sabri at bit.nl
Tue Jan 9 16:01:20 UTC 2001
On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, John Belcher wrote:
> Sabri, did you not understand this...
I am far from perfect.
> > Announcing a netblock doesn't promise that every address in that block
> > exists or is reachable. A network that is blocked for AUP violations
> > doesn't "exist", and usually returns the ICMP message "Unreachable --
> > Administratively Prohibited" specifically designed for such situations.
> > Have you read "Router Requirements"?
> It specifically states that a block can be announced but that does not
> guarantee that all hosts will be reachable. You buy transit from abovenet,
> the block in question goes against their AUP, live with it.
I can live with the fact that they don't route that traffic. But they
should not tell me that they will...
> And furthermore, how can you even begin to take part in this
> conversation if you haven't read all the relevant literature?
Forgive my arrogancy but I don't need "relevant literature" for an ethical
question like this.
> I also strongly suggest you think twice before you accuse a company of
> "terrorism" in the future.
What would you call it then?
--
/* Sabri Berisha, non-interesting network dude.
*
* CCNA, BOFH, Systems admin Linux/FreeBSD
*/
More information about the NANOG
mailing list