Mike, First of all, if we don't all follow the policies, and educate people about them as Sascha also stated, what reason does it serve to have the policies in the first place? So shouldn't the time should really be spent on trying to argue for a policy change in favor of allowing this - instead of trying to fish out arguments to justify not following them in the first place? I mean if there's a broad consensus behind this shouldn't it be done this way? Because I'm having a very hard time otherwise as not reading it along the lines of openly saying "I don't agree with you guys - so I'll just do it the way I so please". In either case this debate seems much more relevant to be had out in the open using the right working group mailing list. -- Med venlig hilsen / Best regards, Ian Johannesen BeeVPN ApS On Jun 19, 2012, at 4:55 PM, Mike Hollowell wrote:
Hi Ian;
Yes, we live in a grey world. What's worse, getting a pile of spam/using computer resources to clean it up or using resources to route a few more prefixes/mitigate it? I suppose it depends on your viewpoint.
It's only going to get worse, but it's always been the same; put more memory in your router or filter routes.
Oh, and sorry for the big sig earlier ;)
Mike
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 16:32 +0200, Ian Johannesen wrote:
Mike,
If it's not supposed to be done like that - it isn't justified using that argument. That would be like saying "It's not allowed to steal, but since so many do it anyway - it'll just be a drop in the ocean if I do it too" :)
-- Med venlig hilsen / Best regards,
Ian Johannesen BeeVPN ApS
mai: ij@beevpn.com
On Jun 19, 2012, at 4:28 PM, Mike Hollowell wrote:
I agree but two points, I was suggesting a method to mitigate the spam and there are 216411 /24 in the table, only 71 /25, two more temporary prefixes are insignificant.
When networks like Blackberry announce their blocks in /24 (Haven't checked recently), what can you do?
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 15:06 +0200, Sascha Lenz wrote:
Hi,
You could announce the /24 and 2 * /25 yourself and blackhole to reduce the impact, not everyone filters on /24.
please don't pollute the DFZ.
Contacting the (other) upstreams and tell them the route is bogus is the only intelligent option. If the inetnum object is removed, they can see the announcement is not valid in the first place.
Everything else has been said already, just don't use PA like that. I'm not sure what would be the proper way to get the route object removed in this case either.
-- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind Regards
Sascha Lenz [SLZ-RIPE] Senior System- & Network Architect
---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
--
Mike Hollowell
Arrowhead Systems Ltd http://www.theinternet.org.uk tel: +44 1782 747044 fax: +44 1782 410734
Arrowhead Systems Limited: A company registered in England and Wales, company number 02694760 Reg'd Office: 5 The Villas, Stoke-On-Trent, Staffordshire. ST4 5AQ. UK
---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.