nanog mailing list archives

Re: scope of the 69/8 problem


From: jlewis () lewis org
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 13:51:22 -0500 (EST)


On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

Come on, you're asking the root and/or TLD operators to renumber their
servers -- not a trivial task -- every few months to intentionally disable
their own service for what amounts to an academic experience.

Not for academic experience, but to encourage people to fix their broken 
filters.  And while renumbering a large network might be non-trivial, 
changing the IP or adding an IP alias on 13 individual servers should be 
a trivial operation.

These folks are in the business of running a critical system that requires
100% uptime for hundreds of millions of users, and they do a damned good
job.  Let them do it in peace, and find some other "must have" service (like
porn) to put in 69/8.

100% uptime for the service, not for each individual server.

So now the 69/8 holders, in addition to driving a campaign to get others 
to fix their networks, should offer free hosting to porn sites?  How about 
free hosting for spamvertized sites?...oh wait, that might make the 
problem worse :)
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Jon Lewis *jlewis () lewis org*|  I route
 System Administrator        |  therefore you are
 Atlantic Net                |  
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________


Current thread: