Re: Re[2]: Low AS - Number

["Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve () telecomplete co uk>]

On Tue, 22 Apr 2003, Bruce Campbell wrote:

> On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, Alex Lambert wrote in reply to Subhi S Hashwa:
>
> > > More money than sense IMHO
> >
> > Reminds me of the shell providers that burn a /24 just to give their kids
> > more IRC vanity hosts.
>
> </hat=RIR>
> <hat=security>
>
>  From the avoiding denial-of-service-attacks-that-impact-your-network
> point of view, putting your attractive-to-irritating-script-kiddies hosts
> on a separate network is a good thing, as you can always drop the specific
> network to save the performance of the rest of your network.

Yes, assuming you have some sort of PI /24 .. (if its just split from an 
aggregate which is also routed as most seem to be you still get the traffic)

> If you happen to have a spare ASN around to do so with, even better.

ASN is irrelevant 

Steve

> </hat>
>
> --==--
> Bruce.
>
> I do not speak for my employer.