nanog mailing list archives
RE: Loose Source Routing
From: Mark Borchers <mborchers () splitrock net>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 13:46:56 -0600
One way to compromise on this without undue security risk is to allow source-routing one hop into your network but no further.
What are people's feelings on loose source routing? The general sentiment around here is that it is a very evil thing. The reason I ask is that there is a certain network out there (who will remain nameless) who refuses to peer unless loose source routing is enabled. I can somewhat understand their reasoning (they can reroute traffic on OUR network as necessary) but the security implications far out way the benefits. Not only this I'm not comfortable with an outside source having control over routing on our network anyway. -Dave -- +------------------------------+ Dave McGaugh, CCNA Peering & IP Backbone Engineer Electric Lightwave, Inc. E-mail: dmcgaugh () eli net Direct Dial: 360.816.3718 Fax: 360.816.3522 +------------------------------+
Current thread:
- Loose Source Routing David McGaugh (Mar 06)
- Re: Loose Source Routing Jared Mauch (Mar 06)
- Re: Loose Source Routing Alan Hannan (Mar 06)
- Re: Loose Source Routing Randy Bush (Mar 06)
- Re: Loose Source Routing David McGaugh (Mar 06)
- RE: Loose Source Routing Walters (Mar 06)
- Re: Loose Source Routing Kevin Oberman (Mar 07)
- Re: Loose Source Routing John Hawkinson (Mar 07)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Loose Source Routing Mark Borchers (Mar 06)
- Re: Loose Source Routing smd (Mar 06)
- Re: Loose Source Routing Vadim Antonov (Mar 06)
- Re: Loose Source Routing Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 06)
- Re: Loose Source Routing John Hawkinson (Mar 07)
- Re: Loose Source Routing Vadim Antonov (Mar 06)
- Re: Loose Source Routing smd (Mar 06)
- Re: Loose Source Routing Alan Hannan (Mar 07)