de-peering for security sake
colinj at gt86car.org.uk
Fri Dec 25 09:50:45 UTC 2015
> On 25 Dec 2015, at 00:48, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Dec 2015 23:44:10 +0000, Colin Johnston said:
>> We really need to ask if China and Russia for that matter will not take abuse
>> reports seriously why allow them to network to the internet ?
> Well, first off, it isn't like China or Russia are just one ASN. You'd have
> to de-peer a bunch of ASN's - and also eliminate any paid transit connections.
> Note that even North Korea has managed to land at least a small presence on
> the Internet. Are you going to ban them too?
> While we're banning countries, how about the country that's known for
> widespread surveillance both foreign and domestic, has one of the strongest
> cyber warfare arsenals around, and has been caught multiple times diverting and
> backdooring routers sold to foreign countries?
> Oh wait, that's the US. Maybe we better rethink this?
> Obviously, there's a lot of organizations that think that being able to
> communicate with China and Russia outweighs the security issues. You are
> of course welcome to make a list of all Russian and Chinese ASNs and block
> their prefixes at your border.
So therefore we must somehow engage and enforce best practice for abuse alerts and action issues
More information about the NANOG