BCP38 [Was: Re: TWC (AS11351) blocking all NTP?]

Christopher Morrow christopher.morrow at gmail.com
Wed Feb 5 18:20:59 UTC 2014


I here tell the spoofer project people are looking to improve their data
and stats... And reporting.
On Feb 5, 2014 1:08 PM, "Livingood, Jason" <
Jason_Livingood at cable.comcast.com> wrote:

> Cool, thanks for the pointed. Now if we could get the data by ASN and
> publish it on a site like bcp38.info, that would be awesome.
>
>
>
> On 2/4/14, 11:03 PM, "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk at iname.com> wrote:
>
> >Here's such a report:
> >
> >http://spoofer.cmand.org/summary.php
> >
> >Frank
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Livingood, Jason [mailto:Jason_Livingood at cable.comcast.com]
> >Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 6:53 PM
> >To: Octavio Alvarez; North American Network Operators' Group
> >Subject: Re: BCP38 [Was: Re: TWC (AS11351) blocking all NTP?]
> >
> >On 2/4/14, 7:48 PM, "Octavio Alvarez" <alvarezp at alvarezp.ods.org> wrote:
> >
> >>What I'm failing to understand, and again, please excuse me if I'm
> >>oversimplifying, is what data do you need from researchers,
> >>specifically. What specific actionable data would be helpful? Why does
> >>the lack of the data prevent you from applying an ACL.
> >
> >What I am suggesting is that the community at large needs measurement
> >data, rather than individual network operators (which already know if they
> >do or do not implement BCP38). Only with a long list of operators that DO
> >prevent spoofing and a list of those that DO NOT, backed up with a decent
> >data set (enough measurement points, enough measurement tests, across
> >enough time, with an openly shared methodology), can the community start
> >to encourage non-adopters to change their position. Just my two cents
> >though...
> >
> >Jason
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>


More information about the NANOG mailing list