[33341] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: net.terrorism
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul A Vixie)
Tue Jan 9 07:40:12 2001
Message-Id: <200101091237.EAA57492@redpaul.mfnx.net>
To: Sabri Berisha <sabri@bit.nl>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Message from Sabri Berisha <sabri@bit.nl>
of "Tue, 09 Jan 2001 13:16:17 +0100." <Pine.LNX.4.30.0101091310540.13096-100000@pomo.bit.nl>
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 04:37:37 -0800
From: Paul A Vixie <vixie@mfnx.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> After this mail, we contacted Above.net again. They basically told us it
> was for our own protection
no.
> because that traffic from that host does not
> comply to their AUP.
yes.
> We specifically told them we really don't mind them
> blackholing that host but *announcing* a route for it. So far no response.
you expect abovenet to cut uunet's /16 into pieces so as to avoid sending to
its customers the parts which violate abovenet's acceptable use guidelines?
even if this were a scalable approach (considering the number of /16's which
have violating /32's inside them, or will in the future), it's something i'd
expect the owner of the /16 to take issue with.
why are we discussing this on nanog?
Paul Vixie <pvixie@mmfn.com>
CTO and SVP, MFN (NASDAQ: MFNX)
