Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: So -- what did happen to Panix?
From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb () cs columbia edu>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:27:12 -0500


In message <OFA6D31A52.8D06553F-ON80257103.005A5CB4-80257103.005AB975 () btradianz
.com>, Michael.Dillon () btradianz com writes:

certified validation of prefix ownership (and path, as has been
pointed out) would be great.  it's clearly a laudable goal and seemed
like the right way to go.  but right now, no one is doing it.  the
rfcs that's i've found have all expired.  and the conversation about
it has reached the point where people seem to have stopped even
disagreeing about how to do it.  in short, it's as dead as dns-sec.
so what are we do do in the meantime?

Perhaps people should stop trying to have these
operational discussions in the IETF and take the
discussions to NANOG where network operators gather.


We have tried, of course; see, for example, NANOG 28 (Salt Lake City).
There was no more consensus at NANOG than in the IETF...

                --Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb



  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]
AlienVault