North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: scope of the 69/8 problem
This discussion falls into a pattern we've seen before: 1) Operators doing the right thing experience a problem created by operators doing the wrong thing. 2) It is not possible to isolate the pain to only the operators doing the wrong thing. 3) The only way to solve the problem is to raise the level of pain across the board so as to force those ultimately causeing the pain to self-marginalize. 4) No one is willing to accept any pain they don't absolutely _have_ to even if it would save them pain in the future 5) Therefore the islands of pain remain indefinately, but as long as I'm not affected, I don't care. The above can be applied to: 1) filtering of 69/8 2) excessive deaggregation of routes 3) RPF 4) Use of RFC1918 in ways which violate RFC1918 (packets crossing enterprise boundaries) 5) Actually using .0 and .255 for networks with masks which allow this. 6) IPv6 7) Multicast 8) etc To bring back around to the issue of 69/8, yes, the only way to solve the problem is to bring a set of "important" things into that network. No one who controls any "important" thing would actually do such a thing. So those folks in 69/8 will likely go out of business, or find ways around their problem which will likely involve other "bad operator" activity, continuing to advance our problems indefinately and in new and interesting ways.