[169184] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "Everyone should be deploying BCP 38! Wait, they are ...."
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (James Milko)
Tue Feb 18 14:20:11 2014
In-Reply-To: <5303B047.5020701@cox.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 14:19:34 -0500
From: James Milko <jmilko@bandwidth.com>
To: Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon@cox.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Is using data from a self-selected group even meaningful when
extrapolated? It's been a while since Stats in college, and it's very
likely the guys from MIT know more than I do, but one of the big things
they pushed was random sampling.
JM
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon@cox.net> wrote:
> On 2/18/2014 11:20 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>
>> Here's a piece which uses the MIT ANA data to assert that the job is
>> mostly done already.
>>
>> Unless I'm very much mistaken, it appears that a large percentage of
>> the failed BCP 38 spoofing tests listed in that data are actually due
>> to customer side NAT routers dropping packets...
>>
>> which is of course egress filtering rather than ingress filtering,
>> and thus doesn't actually apply to our questions.
>>
>> Am I interpreting that correctly?
>>
>
> The date seems a little past "buy by" in light of the very recent
> observations and comments here.
>
> http://www.senki.org/everyone-should-be-deploying-bcp-38-wait-they-are/
>>
>
>
> --
> Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics
> of System Administrators:
> Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to
> learn from their mistakes.
> (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)
>
>
