nanog mailing list archives
Re: de-peering for security sake
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2015 08:55:24 +0530
Hmm, has anyone at all kept count of the number of times such a discussion has started up in just the last year, and how many more times in the past 16 or so years? Mind you, back in say 2004, this discussion would have run to 50 or 60 emails at a bare minimum, in no time at all. --srs On 25-Dec-2015, at 6:55 AM, Stephen Satchell <list () satchell net> wrote:
On 12/24/2015 04:50 PM, Daniel Corbe wrote: Let’s just cut off the entirety of the third world instead of having a tangible mitigation plan in place.While you thing you are making a snarky response, it would be handy for end users to be able to turn on and off access to other countries retail.
Current thread:
- Re: de-peering for security sake, (continued)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Colin Johnston (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Baldur Norddahl (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Colin Johnston (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Owen DeLong (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Clayton Zekelman (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Hugo Slabbert (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake TR Shaw (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Andrew Kirch (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Jared Mauch (Dec 26)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Suresh Ramasubramanian (Dec 24)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Owen DeLong (Dec 24)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Suresh Ramasubramanian (Dec 24)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Hugo Slabbert (Dec 26)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Colin Johnston (Dec 26)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Owen DeLong (Dec 24)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Nick Hilliard (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Daniel Corbe (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Mike Hammett (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Stephen Satchell (Dec 25)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Daniel Corbe (Dec 25)