nanog mailing list archives
Re: de-peering for security sake
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2015 05:44:26 +0900
The costs add up really fast without a corresponding return.
i think there is a corresponding return, just not one that is perceived by the pointy heads. yet. but that is changing as more and more get pwned and the public and legal costs become greater and more apparent. patience. randy
Current thread:
- Re: de-peering for security sake, (continued)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 26)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Baldur Norddahl (Dec 26)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Owen DeLong (Dec 26)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Baldur Norddahl (Dec 26)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Owen DeLong (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Christopher Morrow (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Mike Hale (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Christopher Morrow (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Mike Hale (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Randy Bush (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Christopher Morrow (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Mike Hale (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Randy Bush (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Owen DeLong (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Baldur Norddahl (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Owen DeLong (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Mike Hale (Dec 27)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Matthew Petach (Dec 26)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Damian Menscher via NANOG (Dec 26)
- Re: de-peering for security sake Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 26)