[52759] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Who does source address validation? (was Re: what's that smell?)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Stephen J. Wilcox)
Fri Oct 11 05:09:12 2002
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:14:34 +0100 (BST)
From: "Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve@telecomplete.co.uk>
To: "Greg A. Woods" <woods@weird.com>
Cc: Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net>,
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20021010201100.7DA0DB@proven.weird.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> [ On Thursday, October 10, 2002 at 11:53:18 (-0400), Richard A Steenbergen wrote: ]
> > Subject: Re: Who does source address validation? (was Re: what's that smell?)
> >
> >
> > I'm sure we can all agree on at least the concept that sourcing packets
> > from an address which cannot receive a reply is at least potentially
> > useful, for example to avoid DoS against a critical piece of
> > infrastructure. Would it make people feel better if there was a specific
> > seperate non-routed address space reserved for "router generated messages
> > which don't want replies"? Why?
>
> Why not just use 127.0.0.1?!?!?!?!?
and thats different from rfc1918 because?
