nanog mailing list archives
Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it?
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 00:04:35 +0200
Interestingly, the article misses interception and other non-outage potentials due to (sub) prefix hijacking.
you seem to be entering the world of attacks. the AP article's point was fat fingers. randy
Current thread:
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it?, (continued)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? Randy Bush (May 10)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? Nick Hilliard (May 11)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? Danny McPherson (May 11)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? Marshall Eubanks (May 11)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? Patrick W. Gilmore (May 11)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? Danny McPherson (May 10)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? Larry Sheldon (May 10)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? Danny McPherson (May 10)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? deleskie (May 10)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? Randy Bush (May 10)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? Larry Sheldon (May 10)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? Danny McPherson (May 10)
- Re: Securing the BGP or controlling it? Jorge Amodio (May 10)