nanog mailing list archives

Re: YouTube IP Hijacking


From: Matsuzaki Yoshinobu <maz () iij ad jp>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:17:05 +0900 (JST)


"Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net> wrote
On Feb 25, 2008, at 2:27 AM, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
At 07:15 PM 24-02-08 -0500, Randy Epstein wrote:

More importantly, why is PCCW not prefix filtering their downstreams?

Why?

- Lack of clue
- Couldn't care less
- No revenue

Take your pick - or add your own reason.  PCCW is not alone.  They  
just happen to be the latest in a long line of ISPs that follow the  
same rules - their own.

All good, er, bad reasons.  Fixing the "filter your downstreams"  
problem is very important.  It would also solve 90-something percent  
of the problems mentioned in this thread.  E.g. as7007. :)

I am in the APRICOT meeting in Taipei now, and met a guy from
PCCW/AS3491.  I have showed him this thread, and have suggested
1) validating prefixes from downstreams before accept, and 
2) setting an inbound prefix-filter to their downstreams.

regards,
-----
Matsuzaki Yoshinobu <maz () iij ad jp>
 - IIJ/AS2497  INOC-DBA: 2497*629


Current thread: