BCP38 adoption "incentives"?

Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
Wed Sep 28 20:40:37 UTC 2016

On Tue, 27 Sep 2016 20:44:35 -0000, "White, Andrew" said:

> This assumes the ISP manages the customer's CPE or home router, which is
> often not the case. Adding such ACLs to the upstream device, operated by the
> ISP, is not always easy or feasible.

Hopefully, if you've been burnt by this, you remembered to add it to
the requirements list for the next time you buy customer-facing gear.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 484 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20160928/93182afd/attachment.sig>

More information about the NANOG mailing list