[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

BCP38 adoption "incentives"?

Subject: BCP38 adoption "incentives"?
From: swmike at swm.pp.se (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 16:32:42 +0200 (CEST)
In-reply-to: <CAP032Tv1QtSOOEiL5K5yLQjM87bfvutvCQeqfsyzan4QAmH4mA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <[email protected]> <CAP032Tv1QtSOOEiL5K5yLQjM87bfvutvCQeqfsyzan4QAmH4mA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 27 Sep 2016, Joe Klein wrote:

> What would it take to test for BCP38 for a specific AS?

Well, you can get people to run 
https://www.caida.org/projects/spoofer/#software

I tried to get OpenWrt to include similar software, on by default, but 
some people are afraid that they might incur legal action on themselves by 
doing antispoofing-testing.

https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/tf/anti-spoofing might be of 
interest.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se

Follow-Ups:
- BCP38 adoption "incentives"?
  - From: mike at mikejones.in (Mike Jones)
- BCP38 adoption "incentives"?
  - From: jsklein at gmail.com (Joe Klein)

References:
- BCP38 adoption "incentives"?
  - From: list at satchell.net (Stephen Satchell)
- BCP38 adoption "incentives"?
  - From: jsklein at gmail.com (Joe Klein)

Prev by Date: BCP38 adoption "incentives"?
Next by Date: Krebs on Security booted off Akamai network after DDoS attack proves pricey
Previous by thread: BCP38 adoption "incentives"?
Next by thread: BCP38 adoption "incentives"?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread