We have been talking about all that on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ISOC should play a fundamental role here.
But let's face it:
They cannot operate a mailing list
They cannot operate a membership management system
They cannot fix Internet technical issues to their local sites
INET is a very low key con
Bill Manning;
% Expect to see routers being optimized that will only route
% the upper 64bits of the address, so you might not want to do
% anything smaller than that.
This, if it happens, will be exactly opposed to
the IPv6 design goal, which was to discourage/prohibit
hardware/software desig
On 10 Dec 2003, at 19:04, Franck Martin wrote:
Yes it is problem 2)
and yes I realise it is difficult to solve. This is why I suggested a
new RFC...
Oh, maybe I misread. I thought you were talking about packets from
bogus source addresses.
Numerous ASes support a blackhole community attribut
Yes it is problem 2)
and yes I realise it is difficult to solve. This is why I suggested a new RFC...
Basically we are starting to see viruses and hackers probing our networks... What do we do about it to preserve the Internet badwidth?
Cheers
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 11:48, bill wrote:
So is
So is your problem
1) That you are seeing packets outside of your address range (x.y.z/24)
in which case the upstream router incorrectly routed a packet over your
link
Or
2) That you have x.y.z/24 assigned to you, AND you are only using 10 of
those address, and you are seeing packets for the other
On 10 Dec 2003, at 17:33, Franck Martin wrote:
Apart from setting up ingress(?) filtering to ensure that these packets
gets dropped before they go further,
Google for "Unicast Reverse Path Filtering" (uRPF). The filter you
describe above can be obtained by means of turning loose-mode uRPF on a
b
Another finding...
A solution?
I see that I receive a lot of non-terminated traffic. Meaning a packet
for an IP that does not exists (about 10% inbound)
Apart from setting up ingress(?) filtering to ensure that these packets
gets dropped before they go further, I need to communicate with my
upst
I thought he was sarcastic... :(
My sincere apologies Kurtis...
Cheers
On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 10:30, Joe Abley wrote:
> On 10 Dec 2003, at 16:49, Franck Martin wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 19:34, Kurtis Lindqvist wrote:
> > So my message to the developing countries, is that do not complain
I'm living for more than 10 years in a developing country, and I have worked all this time on ICT and GIS/RS for developing countries in an organisation created by 16 Pacific Islands Government. I have travelled extensively in all these countries and more.
I'm not sure that it is your case, Ku
At 08:34 10/12/03, Kurtis Lindqvist wrote:
There are also a lot of statements on what nations needs in terms of
security and stability. At the same time other nations have solved that
need with the existing model. And they have shared expereinces. IF that is
the problem, there is knowledge to be us
% We assign small networks to IXPs.
%
% The document has the following in it reflecting this:
%
% CIDR block Smallest RIPE NCCSmallest RIPE NCC
% Allocation Assignment
% 2001:0600::/23 /35 /48
%
% Again, if people feel th
Iljitsch van Beijnum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10-dec-03, at 10:28, leo vegoda wrote:
http://lacnic.net/en/chapter-4.html
http://ftp.apnic.net/apnic/docs/ipv6-address-policy
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6-policies.html
http://www.arin.net/policy/ipv6_policy.html
http://www.iana.org/ipaddre
Iljitsch van Beijnum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8-dec-03, at 21:00, Paul Vixie wrote:
for example, bill says above that "/35 routes
are being discouraged" and that's probably true but "by whom?" and
"where?"
It is generally understood in the routing community that some kind of
prefix length f
% > this is not how TBDS works.
%
% May be giving us a URL to TBDS would help us to understand.
http://www.isi.edu/~tbds
% Is it compatible with existing user applications?
most of them.
% Thank you.
% jfc
%
--
--bill
Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the
At 20:46 09/12/03, Bill Manning wrote:
% The main
% criticism is that the "consenus" doesn't include the developing world.
this is not how TBDS works.
May be giving us a URL to TBDS would help us to understand.
Is it compatible with existing user applications?
Thank you.
jfc
On 10-dec-03, at 10:28, leo vegoda wrote:
http://lacnic.net/en/chapter-4.html
http://ftp.apnic.net/apnic/docs/ipv6-address-policy
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6-policies.html
http://www.arin.net/policy/ipv6_policy.html
http://www.iana.org/ipaddress/ipv6-allocation-policy-26jun02
In fact, we h
> So my message to the developing countries, is that do not complain to be
> under-represented to bodies which have free/open membership. Just act.
What strikes me in this thead is that there are a lot of people from the
developed world, making statements on behalf of the develping world.
Thanks
> Put another way, there are 190 or so countries. There are, perhaps 30 or
> so frequently represented on this list. There are fewer which have
> control over the root, the TLDs and the RIRs. If you were in the
The RIRs are under the control of the people that use the associated
resources.
- ku
18 matches
Mail list logo
