North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks
Stephen Satchell wrote:
If some of these companies can't follow the rules, then I see no need for me to discontinue "punishing" allocations on their CIDRs whenever my network is attacked since it seems to be the only method I found to 1) protect my networks and clients and 2) to get someone's attention.
Which numbering authority do you work with day to day?
Me? I work for an authority that many bigger provider should be following its guidelines and setting examples for smaller network operators. I shouldn't have to do the work for some of these bigger operators. I shouldn't have to send emails making them aware that 40 hosts on their /24 are sending out malicious traffic.
Maybe ARIN staff should start re-writing policies and implementing out punishments. Guarantee you if operators were penalized for not following rules, for allowing filth to leave their networks, I bet you many maladies on the net would be cut substantially.
Not going to be a popular stance to most of the bigger fish, but lets get real here, looking at normal everyday life, if a country were shipping rotten products, don't you think those in government would call for measures to halt these products else no business would occur with said country. Why not re-write policies to do the same with networks.
I will always point to dampening/flapping on BGP as a baseline... Company X violates, null route them for a second or two until they comply. They still don't listen double the penalty and null route them twice the amount. Once their pockets start hurting, they'll get a clue. And if their engineers still don't get it, then management of that company would be fools to keep their lazy asses around.
The happiness of society is the end of government. John Adams