Chiloé Temuco wrote:
My opinion:
A tier 1 provider does not care what traffic it carries. That is all a function of the application not the network.
Providers should start caring about what they're carrying. Haven't seen one message yet about the hording of "Storm Bot" and what someone is doing to nip this at the bud. Who better than the big boys. After all what happens when someone launches this botnet at say Mae-East/West or some other backbone.
More or less... The network was intended to move data from one machine to another... The less manipulation in the middle the better... No manipulation of the payload is the name of the game.
Less manipulation = bad theory/design. Again using examples such as Nimda, Code Red, etc., why is it that engineers can sit around spend say - I don't know - an hour a day answering reDumbdant NANOG posts yet these same engineers can't spend 5 hours in one week looking at "up and coming" hurricanes on the horizon (Storm Bot anyone). Yet they can spend another 5 hours a week bitching and moaning about who was on first and how that bot get on second and it's all Michael Dillon's fault because it started someone on BT, and then Gadi Evron warned you last month but you bitched him out so you're now waiting on the gracious Mr. Bellovin to re-write an entire protocol or say "wow that's a good idea!"...
SO something similiar to BGP is your inter-AS protocol for establishing what is where...
I'm all for it. Let's get another working group to implement this right after IPv6 in the year 3000. As for the rest of the email... Sorry got too cumbersome. I was busy writing a response to the next NANOG thread. -- ==================================================== J. Oquendo "Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta" http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xF684C42E sil . infiltrated @ net http://www.infiltrated.net