BCP38 adoption "incentives"?

Mikael Abrahamsson swmike at swm.pp.se
Tue Sep 27 13:17:37 UTC 2016

On Tue, 27 Sep 2016, Zbyněk Pospíchal wrote:

> The implementation of BCP38 over local market strongly increased after 
> massive DDoS attacks in 2013 affecting major part of the industry thanks 
> to an initiative of the most important local IXP.

Hm, so the IX operator looks at packets at the IX (sFlow perhaps), see who 
is sending attack packets, and if they're spoofed, this ISP is then put in 
"quarantine", ie their IX port is basically now useless.

That's an effective way of achieving local compliance. Wonder how this 
would work in other markets, commonly it's bad business to deny service to 
paying customers... But if most agree that this should be done, it's 
definitely a way to achieve compliance.

Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se

More information about the NANOG mailing list