North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: not rewriting next-hop, pointing default, ...
On Thu, Sep 11, 1997 at 03:54:00PM -0800, Randy Bush wrote: > > LSR is actually a significant security issue. So, while I do > > understand and am sympathetic to the operational debugging > > issues that LSR addresses, I think that requiring a peer to > > enable LSR more than 2 hops inside their network from the > > outside world is unreasonable. > > So, you're comfortable with asking for LSR at the IX and a hop behind? > > > In a world where SSH were available in cisco routers and/or > > IPsec were more widely deployed, I might have different views. > > K5 does not give you sufficient warm fuzzies? > > randy Get a few connections to your core hardware hijacked and you'll start installing hardwired modems on console ports and shutting off access to the telnet side entirely. That's a SERIOUS pain in the arse. -- -- Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service | NEW! K56Flex modem support is now available Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| 56kbps DIGITAL ISDN DOV on analog lines! Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal