|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
To: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net> From: "Robert E. Seastrom" <rs@seastrom.com> Date: Mon, 06 Dec 2010 07:30:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20101204064309.2775B1CC0C@ptavv.es.net> (Kevin Oberman's message of "Fri, 03 Dec 2010 22:43:09 -0800") Cc: nanog@nanog.org Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net> writes: >> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu >> > From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu >> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2010 20:00:15 -0500 >> >> On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:24:16 PST, Leo Bicknell said: >> >> > It is speculated that no later than Q1, two more /8's will be allocated, >> > triggering a policy that will give the remaining 5 /8's out to the >> > RIR's. That means, prior to end of Q1, the bogon list will be: >> > >> > 0/8 >> > 10/8 >> > 127/8 >> > 172.16/12 >> > 192.168/16 >> > 224/3 >> >> Oh. And don't forget to do *bidirectional* filtering of these addresses. ;) > > Ahh, not quite. Blocking 224/3 bi-directionally might cause a few issues > if you accept multicast traffic from anyone. You mean like other routers that are speaking OSPF? :-) (people should understand the side effects of filtering before they conf t). -r
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |