> On 9 Mar 2023, at 08:41, William Herrin wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 4:35 AM Lukas Tribus wrote:
>> Perhaps I should have started this topic with a very specific example:
>>
>> - ISP A has a residential customer "Bob" in RFC6598 space
>> - ISP A CGNATs Bob if the destination is
On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 4:35 AM Lukas Tribus wrote:
> Perhaps I should have started this topic with a very specific example:
>
> - ISP A has a residential customer "Bob" in RFC6598 space
> - ISP A CGNATs Bob if the destination is beyond it's own IP space
> - ISP A doesn't CGNAT if the destination
>On 3/8/23 5:35 AM, Lukas Tribus wrote:
>> Perhaps I should have started this topic with a very specific example:
>>
>> - ISP A has a residential customer "Bob" in RFC6598 space
>> - ISP A CGNATs Bob if the destination is beyond it's own IP space
>> - ISP A doesn't CGNAT if the destination is
On 3/8/23 5:35 AM, Lukas Tribus wrote:
Perhaps I should have started this topic with a very specific example:
- ISP A has a residential customer "Bob" in RFC6598 space
- ISP A CGNATs Bob if the destination is beyond it's own IP space
- ISP A doesn't CGNAT if the destination is within its IP
In response to feedback from operational security communities,
CAIDA's source address validation measurement project
(https://spoofer.caida.org) is automatically generating monthly
reports of ASes originating prefixes in BGP for systems from which
we received packets with a spoofed source address.
On 3/8/23 6:17 AM, Victor Kuarsingh wrote:
This was the intention of the RFC. As this space was intended to be
used with an AS's network to service CGN needs. That CGN boundary
likely ends before a given customer and/or neighboring network, so it
would make sense that downstream and
Any Verizon IP engineers lurking on this list that can contact me about
a recurring and chronic IPv6 routing issue in the upstate NY Verizon
FIOS network. Getting feedback from several customers that have valid
IPv6 PD from FIOS but routing is broken 2-3 hops out in Verizons
network. This is
>
> That doesn't mean publically available blocklists need to misrepresent
> their use-case.
>
>
Respectfully, this is exceptionally ignorant.
Team Cymru is not misrepresenting anything. They are very specific and
detailed about which addresses the bogons and fullbogons lists contain.
They also
On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 7:43 AM Lukas Tribus wrote:
> > The think that you have to remember to do is to exclude locally
> > significant (100.64/10, RFC 1918, et al.) from those filters /or/
> > account for them in another way.
>
> You know all this if you are the network operator.
>
> If you are
> The think that you have to remember to do is to exclude locally
> significant (100.64/10, RFC 1918, et al.) from those filters /or/
> account for them in another way.
You know all this if you are the network operator.
If you are the customer of the ISP, let's say a datacenter/cloud
customer
> You'll have to connect the dots for me here, I'm not seeing the
> problem. The ISP's local network is not "the public Internet."
It very much is.
An autonomous system can contain both "eyeballs" (possibly RFC6598
adressed) and services in datacenters/clouds, it's not *always* a
different ISP.
>> They talk about bogon prefixes "for hosts", provide configuration
>> examples for Cisco ASA firewalls,
>
> Which are perfectly valid use cases for some networks / situations.
Absolutely, everybody's free to drop whatever they like on their gear,
I'm sure there are networks, gear, applied and
Hello,
> It is just that, marketing.
I disagree, authoritative and accurate product description and
documentation of the tools used by the public matter a lot. If a
ticket lands on my desk because a third party misuses a tool, I want
to point to a single authoritative source of information.
>
Quick (and critical) correction:
bar charts on the ***left*** are from *NOGs;
bar charts on the ***right*** are from commissioned market research.
Cheers,
Etienne
On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 2:06 PM Etienne-Victor Depasquale
wrote:
> The picture changes significantly when an operator's choice is
14 matches
Mail list logo
