Re: So -- what did happen to Panix?

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb () cs columbia edu>]

In message <OFA6D31A52.8D06553F-ON80257103.005A5CB4-80257103.005AB975@btradianz
.com>, Michael.Dillon () btradianz com writes:
> > certified validation of prefix ownership (and path, as has been
> > pointed out) would be great.  it's clearly a laudable goal and seemed
> > like the right way to go.  but right now, no one is doing it.  the
> > rfcs that's i've found have all expired.  and the conversation about
> > it has reached the point where people seem to have stopped even
> > disagreeing about how to do it.  in short, it's as dead as dns-sec.
> > so what are we do do in the meantime?
>
> Perhaps people should stop trying to have these
> operational discussions in the IETF and take the
> discussions to NANOG where network operators gather.


We have tried, of course; see, for example, NANOG 28 (Salt Lake City).
There was no more consensus at NANOG than in the IETF...

                --Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb