nanog mailing list archives

Re: IPv4 Hijacking For Idiots


From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 21:16:05 -0400

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Mark Andrews <marka () isc org> wrote:


In message <CAL9jLaZNRdE0gL4nVn93vhv1BOBtx0EKgJet8pVXa3Mve1Gy_Q@mail.
gmail.com>, Christopher Morrow writes:

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 8:26 PM, Mark Andrews <marka () isc org> wrote:

Now we could continue discussing how easy it is to hijack addresses
of we could spend the time addressing the problem.  All it takes is
a couple of transit providers to no longer accept word-of-mouth and
the world will transition overnight.

i don't think any transit providers were used in the previous thread
worth
of examples/comms...
I don't know that IXP folk either:
  1) want to be the police of this
  2) should actually be the police of this (what is internet abuse? from
who's perspective? oh...)

The 'solution' here isn't new though... well, one solution anyway:
  https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6810

You missed the point.  We have the mechanisms to prevent hijacking
today.  We just need to use them and stop using the traditional


apologies for taking your bait.


mechanisms which cannot be mathematically be verified as correct.


i agree.


Getting to that stage requires several companies to simultaneously
say "we will no longer accept <list> as valid mechanisms to verify
routes announcements.  You need to use X or else we won't accept
the announcement".  Yes, this requires guts to do.


agreed here as well.


Mark
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka () isc org



Current thread: