>I am not sure if anyone would ever deploy such mechanism. >For contents it's useless as they have to filter DDoSes before they reach >their network. >For carriers is poorly scalable as they'd have to configure thousands of >prefixes. >It could make sense for eyeballs but they hardly would drop all the traffic >from their customers even if they're participating in a DDoS >(also note that inbound customer traffic is rarely an issue for eyeballs)
Marco, Can you please clarify for me the following? 1. Are your comments directed at uRPF (BCP-84) in general? 2. If not, are they directed specifically at strict or feasible-path uRPF? Once I get clarity into that I think I can better address your concerns. Thanks. Sriram _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
