In a message written on Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 10:20:43AM +0200, Eliot Lear wrote:
So. There are mine. You probably have others you would add to the list. I think I can speak for Vince and Dave when I say that we should consider these cases as we are actually removing 240.0.0.0/4 from our bogon filters, because it's all academic if we don't change our code now.
I have avoided the longer thread, so I thought replying to yours might be a better option. I think the discussion of what to do with 240.0.0.0/4 is premature. We need to get the code fixed, that is the most important item at this time. When we get closer to needing 240.0.0.0/4 we can evaluate at that time how much of the code has been fixed, and what the risk is to deployment. By the time we need it we may find 95% of the devices have been fixed, or we may find 5%. The problem is we neither know the timeframe in which we need it, nor do we know how fast vendors can get it fixed. In order to have the most options I applaud Vince for running this through the IETF, and I would ask everyone on this list to make it a checklist item for your very next vendor meeting. This is a small change, vendors will make it, but only if customers ask for it. Ask for patched software today and we'll be much better off tomorrow. -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request@tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org