mailing list archives
Re: do bogon filters still help?
From: "william(at)elan.net" <william () elan net>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:32:20 -0800 (PST)
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Edward Lewis wrote:
At 20:28 +0100 1/11/06, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Martin Hannigan:
You should move 126.96.36.199/24 from SPECIAL to YES (although you
shouldn't see source addresses from that prefix, no matter what the
folks at bit.nl think). 169.254.0.0/16 should be NO (otherwise it
wouldn't be link-local).
Good example as to why to use authoratative sources only.
But most authoritative sources are too shy to make explicit
operational recommendations. 8-)
The authoritative sources put the data out there. What more can you ask of
them? What more do you want? It's been said that the neutral parties (the
authorities are supposed to be neutral) should not make business decisions
for the industry. Recommending route filters is a business decision.
Operational recommendations in general are business decisions.
Nevertheless I'd prefer to see authoritative source (i.e. ICANN & IANA)
be more involved then just text file on a website. For example IETF
does more both in terms of notifications (which they sent to multiple
lists for each published RFC - with lists being different depending on
what RFC its on-topic for) and in terms of information for operational
use (i.e. published BCPs and separate OPS area). Ultimately of course
IANA is closely related to activities of IETF but I think it does have
its own role to play and notifications of changes to its indexes is
within its area of responsibility.
william () elan net