In those cases we do mapping database RPF lookups. 

Dino



> On May 19, 2014, at 10:14 AM, Ronald Bonica <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Dino,
> 
> The Spoofer Project (http://spoofer.cmand.org/summary.php) offers a 
> longitudinal view of BCP 38 deployment. I think that the results that they 
> report validate Sander's objection. Furthermore, they may suggest that 
> Sander's objection will remain valid for years to come.
> 
>                                                                               
>                                                     Ron
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dino Farinacci [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: Friday, May 16, 2014 7:37 PM
>> To: Sander Steffann
>> Cc: Ronald Bonica; Roger Jorgensen; [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [lisp] Restarting last call on LISP threats
>> 
>>> Unfortunately this is not unlikely :(  I certainly wouldn't consider it an
>> amazing feat... BCP38 is not implemented as much as it should be.
>> 
>> I know there are many cases where BCP38 is not practice but more and more
>> access providers due uRPF.
>> 
>> You only need one in the path. And the ones that don't do it are using
>> resources to transit packets to possible black holes.
>> 
>> Dino

_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

Reply via email to