There's a wikipedia article:
.. that a post I wrote up for a local computer club magazine somehow suffices
as primary reference material for.
Even though I think this is partially hilarious, would someone mind making
it a little more authoritive and well-referenced? My article was definitely
not written to be used as any form of source, primary or otherwise.
Improving it wouldn't hurt, but though your note is the only listed
"reference" it also includes external links to the cnet news article
about it, two NANOG list messages, "Origin Authentication in
Interdomain Routing" by Aiello, Ioannis, and McDaniel, and a Penn
State routing seminar slide deck.
It's not badly sourced all things considered; the other sources could
be more prominently referred to, though.