nanog mailing list archives

Changing the way we talk about BCP38 [Was: Re: "Everyone should be deploying BCP 38! Wait, they are ...."]


From: Paul Ferguson <fergdawgster () mykolab com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 11:43:25 -0800

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Below:

On 2/18/2014 11:22 AM, Jared Mauch wrote:

On Feb 18, 2014, at 1:40 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick () ianai net>
wrote:

Barry is a well respected security researcher. I'm surprised he
posted this.

In his defense, he did it over a year ago (June 11, 2012). Maybe
we should ask him about it. I'll do that now....

I'm not surprised in any regard.  There are too many names for
BCP-38, SAV, SSAC-004, BCP-84, Ingress Filtering, etc..


This is why I am now using the phrase "anti-spoofing" when talking
about this in public. It far less cryptic, and I am breaking into
bite-sized components that people can actually understand.

As engineers & technical people, we need to start using language
people can wrap their brains around easily.

Remember: We are living in the age of instant gratification and
Attention Deficit Disorder.  :-)

- - ferg


There are many networks that perform this best practice either by
"default" through NAT/firewalls or by explicit configuration of the
devices.

There are many networks that one will never be able to measure nor
audit as well, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to work
on tracking back spoofed packets and reporting the attacks, and
securing devices.

- Jared






- -- 
Paul Ferguson
VP Threat Intelligence, IID
PGP Public Key ID: 0x54DC85B2

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iF4EAREIAAYFAlMDt90ACgkQKJasdVTchbIBrwD/YyUeK4SvS6grQdarKnoJiZXD
2YoTf+lRXpXnkSTPUdUA/3TH8jnXNx6DkOw9nkbVIi6Ek8ehTLUPpDPBe0oELQj4
=Cf2C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Current thread: