[138532] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv4 address shortage? Really?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Wed Mar 9 10:26:07 2011
To: Vadim Antonov <avg@kotovnik.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 09 Mar 2011 03:34:18 PST."
<1299670458.29652.219.camel@kotti.kotovnik.com>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 10:25:51 -0500
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1299684351_5278P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 03:34:18 PST, Vadim Antonov said:
> Steven Bellovin wrote:
>
> > And then some other dim bulb will connect one of those 5 layers to the
> > outside world...
Broken attribution alert - I wrote that, not Steve..
> A dim bulb has infinite (and often much subtler) ways of screwing
> routing in his employer's network. Protecting against idiots is the
> weakest argument I ever heard for architectural design.
Yes, a dim bulb can do other things. That doesn't mean it's OK to simply
ignore totally predictable failure modes. Consider BGP - what happens when
some dim bulb manages to create a routing loop? What would have happened if the
BGP designers had said "We're not going to worry about this because there's
other things the dim bulb can do to hose himself"?
--==_Exmh_1299684351_5278P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001
iD8DBQFNd5v/cC3lWbTT17ARAogWAKDQmKMoJWkCF6pmM+SVHed2xvwRVQCfRZHX
6ebfTYD3KaG3JGkKZJ1HRKk=
=PL9M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1299684351_5278P--
