[191848] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BCP38 adoption "incentives"?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alain Hebert)
Thu Sep 29 11:47:44 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Alain Hebert <ahebert@pubnix.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 11:47:09 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20160929153109.GA75993@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Reply-To: ahebert@pubnix.net
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Well there is money to be made in DDoS protection... See our
"friends" still hosting "those" pay sites.
Do not expect the vendors to cut themself of that market.
-----
Alain Hebert ahebert@pubnix.net
PubNIX Inc.
50 boul. St-Charles
P.O. Box 26770 Beaconsfield, Quebec H9W 6G7
Tel: 514-990-5911 http://www.pubnix.net Fax: 514-990-9443
On 09/29/16 11:31, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 08:44:35PM +0000, White, Andrew wrote:
>> This assumes the ISP manages the customer's CPE or home router, which is often not the case. Adding such ACLs to the upstream device, operated by the ISP, is not always easy or feasible.
> Unicast RFP should be a feature every ISP requires of all edge
> devices for at least 15 years now. It should be on by default for
> virtually all connections, and disabled only by request or when
> there are circumstances to suggest it would break things (e.g. a
> request for BGP with full tables over the link).
>
> At this point there's no excuse, anyone who has gear who can't do
> that has been asleep at the switch. It's been a standard feature
> in too much gear for too long.
>
