[121177] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: SORBS on autopilot?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jed Smith)
Tue Jan 12 13:59:40 2010
From: Jed Smith <jed@jedsmith.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100112184859.GB12541@vt.edu>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 13:59:09 -0500
To: Dave Martin <darkmoon@vt.edu>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jan 12, 2010, at 1:48 PM, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 11:51:47AM -0500, Jed Smith wrote:
>> On Jan 11, 2010, at 11:11 AM, Jon Lewis wrote:
>> The vibe I got from a number of administrators I talked to about it =
was "why
>> would a standards document assume an IPv4/IPv6 unicast address is a =
residential
>> customer with a modem, forcing those with allocations to prove that =
they are
>> not residentially allocated rather than the other way around?"
>=20
> Because a default allow policy doesn't work in today's environment.
Blocking based on PTR alone is dangerous, is what I'm saying. I know =
default
deny is important, but the decision can only be minorly influenced by =
PTR, not
entirely made on it. There needs to be a better way, but there isn't.
JS
