nanog mailing list archives

Re: NOOP and Terremark


From: jamie rishaw <j () arpa com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:01:01 -0500

I'm sorry, I should have phrased differently.

I meant: By the number of responses I've received that have been told to me
"in private," or with a "this is not public info,"...

While I certainly would not violate those restraints I do agree with you.

jamie



On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Dobbins, Roland <rdobbins () arbor net> wrote:


On Oct 28, 2013, at 5:27 PM, jamie rishaw <j () arpa com> wrote:

 It's clear that we all still consider open discussions on things like
this to be something to be kept to a small vetted community.

It's not clear to me at all.

Real-time discussions of specific events in order to coordinate response,
sure - it's important to limit those communications to the
groups/individuals who can do something useful to help in real time.

General discussion of attack characteristics, defensive tactics, etc.,
absolutely not - they must be shouted from the rooftops.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins () arbor net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>

          Luck is the residue of opportunity and design.

                       -- John Milton





-- 
jamie rishaw // .com.arpa@j <- reverse it. ish.

*"Reality defeats prejudice."* - *Rep. Barney Frank*


Current thread: