
Randy,

I don't think I implied anything of the sort.

I did, however, pipe up when a BCP is mentioned that I endorse,
and co-authored -- and likewise, cannot figure out for life of
me, why there is such push-back from the Ops community on doing
The Right Thing.

Having said that, botnets don't need to spoof addresses -- the
sheer dispersion of geographic and AS infection base renders the
whole point of spoofing almost moot.

And having said that, it doesn't make BCP 38 any less valid.

- ferg


-- Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:

> I don't want to detract from the heat of this discussion, as
> important as it is, but it (the discussion) illustrates a point
> that RIPE has recognized -- and is actively perusing -- yet, ISPs
> on this continent seem consistently to ignore: The consistent
> implementation of BCP 38.

oh?  you have knowledge that this botnet attack used spoofed source
addresses?

randy

--
"Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson
 Engineering Architecture for the Internet
 fergdawg(at)netzero.net
 ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/


