nanog mailing list archives
Re: So -- what did happen to Panix?
From: sandy () tislabs com
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:21:23 -0500 (EST)
Michael.Dillon wrote:
Writing RFCs is a fine way to document operational best practices, but it is not a good way to work out joint operational practices.
Seems to me that operational problem solving works better when the problem is not thrown into the laps of the protocol designers.
If the solution turns out to be joint operational practice, then operators need to be involved, natch. If the solution turns out to be protocols, then the protocol designers need to be involved along with the operators. I'm not so certain that operational practices will fix this problem - it could be argued that the fundamental vulnerabilites in the way routing info is communicated would be better fixed in the protocol. --Sandy
Current thread:
- Re: So -- what did happen to Panix?, (continued)
- Re: So -- what did happen to Panix? Patrick W. Gilmore (Jan 27)
- Re: So -- what did happen to Panix? Michael . Dillon (Jan 30)
- Re: So -- what did happen to Panix? Todd Underwood (Jan 27)
- Re: So -- what did happen to Panix? Michael . Dillon (Jan 27)
- Re: So -- what did happen to Panix? Steven M. Bellovin (Jan 28)
- Re: So -- what did happen to Panix? Michael . Dillon (Jan 30)
- Re: So -- what did happen to Panix? Todd Underwood (Jan 27)
- Re: So -- what did happen to Panix? Todd Underwood (Jan 30)