large BCP38 compliance testing

Thu Oct 2 15:54:01 UTC 2014

On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 12:10:39 +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson said:

> I have been getting pushback from people that this might be "illegal".
> Could anyone please tell me what's illegal about trying to send a packet
> with a random source address?

The *real* problem isn't the testing.

It's the assumption that you can actually *do* anything useful with this data.
Name-n-shame probably won't get us far - and the way the US works, if there's a
large cartel of BCP38-compliant providers calling out the offenders by name,
you might encounter an offender that finds it cheaper to send a lawyer chanting
'restraint of trade!' or similar rather than actually fixing their problem....

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 848 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20141002/1e7d8b04/attachment.sig>