mailing list archives
RE: BCP38 tester?
From: "Frank Bulk \(iname.com\)" <frnkblk () iname com>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 13:50:11 -0500
The good news is that source address spoofing does seem to fail with most CPE's NAT.
At the end of the day, just turn on uRPF and/or use ACLs. It's amazing how much destination 192.168.0.0/24 and
192.168.1.0/24 our ACLs also block.
From: Jay Ashworth [mailto:jra () baylink com]
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2013 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: BCP38 tester?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alain Hebert" <ahebert () pubnix net>
An easy target would be anti-virus/trojan/security software
providers that could add a BCP38 check to their software =D
Yes, but penetration is a problem, which is why I was thinking about
people like YouTube, Ookla, and the like.
Any Flash app that lots of people run frequently. Assuming those apps
could generate the packets, which, on reflection, I would bet they can't.
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra () baylink com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274
Re: BCP38 tester? Alain Hebert (Apr 01)
Re: BCP38 tester? Peter Baldridge (Apr 01)
Re: BCP38 tester? Jima (Apr 01)
Re: BCP38 tester? Jay Ashworth (Apr 01)
RE: BCP38 tester? Frank Bulk \(iname.com\) (Apr 01)
- Re: BCP38 tester?, (continued)