Re: [GROW] ietf 97 agenda

Updated the agenda to slide Sriram's talk to the end, hopefully Susan will be able to do her meeting start and jump to grow for the relevant parts of conversation she's interested here :) On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 6:23 PM, Susan Hares wrote: > Thanks! > > > > Sue > > > > *From:*

Re: [GROW] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-sriram-opsec-urpf-improvements-00.txt

On 11/13/16 8:12 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote: > joel jaeggli wrote: >> The case where routine maintance creates temporary blackholes is >> basically ubiquitious were you attempting to use urp strict. > > oh indeed - I've been at the receiving end of exactly this type of > blackholing. Very annoying.

Re: [GROW] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-sriram-opsec-urpf-improvements-00.txt

On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote: > On Nov 13, Marco Marzetti wrote: > >> Carriers cannot do that as they cannot drop ALL the traffic from a >> certain source if the request is not coming from the owner. > They may want to do this for policy

Re: [GROW] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-sriram-opsec-urpf-improvements-00.txt

On Nov 13, Marco Marzetti wrote: > Carriers cannot do that as they cannot drop ALL the traffic from a > certain source if the request is not coming from the owner. They may want to do this for policy reasons, usually because malicious traffic is being sourced and the customer

Re: [GROW] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-sriram-opsec-urpf-improvements-00.txt

joel jaeggli wrote: > The case where routine maintance creates temporary blackholes is > basically ubiquitious were you attempting to use urp strict. oh indeed - I've been at the receiving end of exactly this type of blackholing. Very annoying. But I just wonder if urpf is the best tool to