North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: No, ORBS is a good tool [WAS: Alright, ORBS sucks - next topic,please ;) [was RE: RBL-type BGPservice for known rogue networks?]]
----- Original Message ----- From: "Pim van Riezen" <email@example.com> To: "JP Donnio" <ml-nanog@TBS-internet.com> Cc: "Peter van Dijk" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2000 2:17 PM Subject: Re: No, ORBS is a good tool [WAS: Alright, ORBS sucks - next topic,please ;) [was RE: RBL-type BGPservice for known rogue networks?]] > > Well we cannot really oppose this, who on this list is providing access to > > the entire whole internet? Obviously not abovenet. If they want to deny > > traffic from the tester entering their network, why not. You should make > > sure that no other traffic (your business) is hurt by this. Why not setup an > > AS with a /24 and run the tester from there? Or several of them in diverse > > locations. > > Problem is, we're just an ISP. So we'd have to get our uplinks to organize > that. And since the purpose of the blackhole was beyond blocking the > tester (they did have a similair block on the /32 of the tester, which was > at least morally defendable), but rather to pressure us to take the thing > offline, I'm afraid that moving it to another /24 will not make any > difference, there'd still be 'retaliations' against the hosting ISP. That's interesting. This would prove the Abovenet's behaviour is evil; if they can filter on the /32 but choose to filter on the /24, they are morally undefendable. Even ORBS opposers cannot support such behavior I guess!