On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 11:19 PM Ben Cannon <b...@6by7.net> wrote: > With the difficulty of getting IPs off SPAM RBLs being what they are, I’m > not sure I like the bone-chilling idea of accepting null-routing entire > ranges as standard practice. >
I didn't say spam-rbl. > > Same reasons, no central repository, no easy/quick/objective/cheap way to > remove an illegitimate entry - and then the real problem, there’s just 6 > billion of them now and > they’re all over the place and you’re listed in one of them probably no > matter who you are. > > -Ben. > > -Ben Cannon > CEO 6x7 Networks & 6x7 Telecom, LLC > b...@6by7.net > > > > On Sep 18, 2019, at 6:57 PM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I tried to ask this earlier, I think, but... > > "who cares about the sale?" > > I ask this because I think getting wrapped around that axle is the > wrong place to spend resources. > If the outcome of 'someone' controlling IP space is that there is > abusive activity coming from that space and either no actions are > taken to correct that, OR the problem is endemic and there is no > change over time, then the action the community should take is not > accepting routes to these prefixes. Once everyone (or enough > everyones) stop accepting packets/paths the address space isn't > important anymore. > > If the 'rightful owners' of the space need/want it back there's clear > redress for them via their RIR and the various networks which are / > were offering transit to these prefixes. > > -chris > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 6:02 PM Job Snijders <j...@instituut.net> wrote: > > > It would be good to see some receipts, offered by the selling party. > > >
