BCP38 - Internet Death Penalty

Wed Mar 27 22:31:32 UTC 2013

On Mar 27, 2013, at 4:54 PM, Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org>
 wrote:
>> Umm... How many North American ISP's/datacenters/web hosting firms were 
>> aware of the BCP 38 development as it was on-going, and participated in 
>> some manner in its review?  ...
> 
> I'd say enough were aware. :-)
> 
> 8. Acknowledgments
> 
>   The North American Network Operators Group (NANOG) [5] group as a
>   whole deserves special credit for openly discussing these issues and
>   actively seeking possible solutions. Also, thanks to Justin Newton
>   [Priori Networks] and Steve Bielagus [IronBridge Networks].  for
>   their comments and contributions.

Mark - 

  That's plenty of consideration for voluntary efforts (which is what
  we've tried to date in various forums with rather limited success...)

  Whether that's sufficient notice and consideration on which to base
  mandatory requirements from a public policy perspective is not clear.

  Frankly, I would suggest that NANOG document a best common operating 
  practice (BCOP) based on BCP38 (written at a somewhat higher level 
  which describes what types of connections ingress filtering it applies
  to, e.g. consumer edge, business, transit, etc.; whether it should 
  be just a customer default or an absolute requirement, etc.), and 
  then holding an approval process to make the result a NANOG BCOP...
  <http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog57/presentations/Monday/mon.general.Grundemann.BCOP.12.pdf>
  If this were done in a fairly formal manner, the result would be closer
  to the prior example (National Fire Protection Association code) and 
  would far more convincing both in aiding governments to pick up this 
  cause in the region, as well as encouraging similar efforts elsewhere.

FYI,
/John