Securing the BGP or controlling it?

deleskie at gmail.com deleskie at gmail.com
Mon May 10 17:35:23 CDT 2010


I don't suspect we'd need a central authority for that.  I'm sure it only enough for you traffic to pass with anyones national boundry to be 'at risk' of such things

-jim
Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon at cox.net>
Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 15:52:34 
To: <nanog at nanog.org>
Subject: Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it?

On 5/10/2010 15:31, Anton Kapela wrote:
> 
> On May 9, 2010, at 11:39 PM, Franck Martin wrote:
> 
>> http://skunkpost.com/news.sp?newsId=2327
> 
> "Just how fragile is the internet?"
> 
> Rhetoric, much?
> 
> Interestingly, the article misses interception and other non-outage
> potentials due to (sub) prefix hijacking.

At the risk of seeming to be a conspiracy theorist, I am worried that
with "Central Authority" we might not have "hijacking" but "rerouting
for inspection and correction".

-- 
Somebody should have said:
A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner.

Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well armed lamb contesting
the vote.

Requiescas in pace o email
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
Eppure si rinfresca

ICBM Targeting Information:  http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml

	



More information about the NANOG mailing list