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/ripe-atlas@ripe.net/
[atlas] What is 'iwantbcp38compliancetesting' user tag?
- Previous message (by thread): [atlas] What is 'iwantbcp38compliancetesting' user tag?
- Next message (by thread): [atlas] What is 'iwantbcp38compliancetesting' user tag?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Daniel Karrenberg
daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net
Mon Jan 11 10:39:45 CET 2016
On 10.01.16 6:17 , Emile Aben wrote: > Hi, > > As for the origin of the tag: I set this on my probe as an experiment to > see if one could do a poll among probe hosts. Apparently the hosts of 21 > other probes already found the tag without it every being advertised. > > Now that it is more widely known it would probably be interesting for > proponents of BCP38 compliance-testing to set that probe-tag, and for > opponents to set the 'idontwantbcp38compliancetesting' probe-tag. In general I like creative use of the RIPE Atlas system. I could see the use of a "SourceAddressSpoofOK" tag that says it would be OK to spoof source addresses when sending traffic from this probe. This kind of opt-in statement has meaning. It would also be a constructive way to get around the risks associated with source address spoofing from probes of unsuspecting hosts. However doing a poll by setting probe tags which are meant to convey attributes of the probe and not opinions of the host is not really useful. This is aggravated by the lack of a clear definition for the meaning of this tag. Daniel
- Previous message (by thread): [atlas] What is 'iwantbcp38compliancetesting' user tag?
- Next message (by thread): [atlas] What is 'iwantbcp38compliancetesting' user tag?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]