This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Daniel Karrenberg
daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net
Tue Feb 24 17:29:42 CET 2004
On 24.02 16:17, Michael.Dillon at radianz.com wrote: > >The RIPE NCC has prepared a draft document titled "De-Bogonising New > >Address Blocks": > > That is a misleading title. I thought it was to the point and rather cute ;-). > > The problem is that ISPs cannot react quickly enough > to open filters when new ranges are allocated. The proposed > solution is to provide advance notification. I suppose this > could allow ISPs to open filters before the new addresses > are actually in use officially. This is the status quo, aka best *current* practise. > However, it will also allow spammers to announce this > space and get it through bogon filters. Correct, but only in the absence of more specific filtering. the problem this proposal aims to correct is the increasing number of false positives caused by the apparent *serious* lag in relatively static bogon filtering. > The real solution to this problem is to make it > possible for ISPs to closely track RIR allocations > in their filters in a semi-automated way. There may > still be a few days of delay before a new allocation > is fully routable but ISPs can compensate for that > with internal processes. > > Why can't ISPs subscribe to a feed of all new > RIPE allocations in near real-time? Personally I think this is a great idea and if we hear from a lot of operators actually willing to take such feeds it may become reality. However there are a number of serious issues with something like this, not the least of which are the liability issues in case this goes wrong very dynamically and semi-automatdly. It is certainly something to progress if there is enough interest. However I think the current proposal shold go ahead too because the false positives are a real problem now Daniel
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] New Draft Document: De-boganising New Address Blocks
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]