On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 05:56:50PM +0200, Rob Janssen wrote: || Vincent Zweije schreef: || > I'm not sure I'd want my ISP blocking packets with globally unroutable || > source addresses. As long as they're targeted at me, I'll have them. || > || > In fact, I don't really want my ISP to do any filtering. I want them || > to shove around packets for me. || > || > || Well, when your provider is XS4ALL (which your signature suggests), they || *are* filtering those packets both incoming and outgoing. || I think it is responsible action by ISPs to do ingress filtering, || because the advantages outweigh the disadvantages in most cases.
I agree that is probably the responsible action. Nevertheless, personally I think I would like to decide for myself. But we digress. :-D || > Anyone sending out such packets will probably have a very hard time || > getting a reply. If there is a problem, it will sort out itself soon || > enough. || > || I think you are over-estimating the fault finding abilities of the || average Internet user. I have seen often enough that bad error || conditions persist for a long time, even after the admin has been || notified. Many admins won't put fault finding at a high priority as || long as the network is not completely down. I am guessing that if someone misconfigures a device to use unroutable addresses, more than just NTP will be broken, and it will probably be noticed and acted on. Ciao. Vincent. -- Vincent Zweije <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "If you're flamed in a group you <http://www.xs4all.nl/~zweije/> | don't read, does anybody get burnt?" [Xhost should be taken out and shot] | -- Paul Tomblin on a.s.r.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ timekeepers mailing list [email protected] https://fortytwo.ch/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/timekeepers
