nanog mailing list archives

Re: The power of default configurations


From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra () baylink com>
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 22:24:34 -0400


On Sun, Apr 10, 2005 at 09:15:39PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
How can we make more software "safe by default?"  Because relying on the
user or sysadmin to make it safe isn't working.  That includes safe
default configurations that are conservative in what they send, such as
doing RFC1918 lookups against root name servers.  The original BIND
from Berkeley included a "localhost" file, why not a "workgroup" file
and an RFC1918 file?

And, to tie the thread title back in to one example of what you're
saying there, five years ago when I first saw NANOG, there might have
been a reason why you had to let forged source addresses leak through
your edge devices...

but that was five years ago.  Have manufacturers *really* not made that
item a default by now?  Have providers *really* not changed out that
equipment in five years?  I mean, this is internet time, right?

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra () baylink com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274

      If you can read this... thank a system administrator.  Or two.  --me


Current thread: