From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Jul 19 16:41:23 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from morpheus.skynet.be (morpheus.skynet.be [195.238.2.39]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DF3D37B95C for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2000 16:41:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from blk@skynet.be) Received: from [10.0.1.2] (dialup183.brussels.skynet.be [195.238.19.183]) by morpheus.skynet.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C70BDB19; Thu, 20 Jul 2000 01:41:13 +0200 (MET DST) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: blk@pop.skynet.be Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2000 01:10:53 +0200 To: "David Schwartz" , "Brett Glass" , "Rahul Siddharthan" , From: Brad Knowles Subject: RE: ORBS vs MAPS Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 3:37 PM -0700 2000/7/19, David Schwartz wrote: > Since it's entirely among entities that have given informed written > consent, it's quite a stretch to call it fraudulent. I have to disagree. The MAPS eBGP4 routing tables are supposed to be used for the specific purpose of black-holing all packets going to or coming from servers that are generating lots of spam or are actively allowing themselves to be abused for relaying lots of spam, and for whom repeated attempts to get them to fix their problem have fallen on deaf ears. While I disagree with a lot of the things that the ORBS project does, I don't see it doing any of these things, and therefore there is no reason why they should be having packets to/from them being black-holed across all ISPs that having peering agreements with Above.Net or other networks that are actively advertising these routes. This is affecting more people than just those that are subscribing to MAPS -- even networks that aren't subscribed to MAPS, but are peers of Above.Net, are seeing these bogus routes, and in all probability are propagating these bogus routes. I haven't heard Dave's or Paul's side of this matter, and I think I know them well enough to give them a great deal of "benefit of the doubt", however given what little I've heard so far, it really does sound to me like they are doing themselves a grave dis-service in this matter, and at precisely the sort of time that they don't want or need to be unnecessarily muddying the waters, what with the other legal battles they're already embroiled in. -- These are my opinions -- not to be taken as official Skynet policy ====================================================================== Brad Knowles, || Belgacom Skynet SA/NV Systems Architect, Mail/News/FTP/Proxy Admin || Rue Colonel Bourg, 124 Phone/Fax: +32-2-706.13.11/12.49 || B-1140 Brussels http://www.skynet.be || Belgium To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message