RE: 69/8 problem -- Would CNN care?

Hi Avleen,

When you start crying to the list because your new IP allocation is blocked, I'll try to be the first to tell you that "The solution here is *VERY* simple".

Like it or not, the 69/8 problem *IS* operational content. If message threads containing operational content offend or disturb you in some way, I recommend that you tune in next week, when I'm sure that there will be plenty of off-topic emails for you to read.


Post Hopping:

From: Avleen Vig

No offense Lee, but OH MY GOD, can we *PLEASE* drop this now?
If 69/8 is unreachable by some people, it's REALLY NOT THAT IMPORTANT.

If 10% of the internet cannot reach 69/8, then it's the problem of that
10%. I'm sure when people cannot reach it they'll eventually figure it
out on their own if they don't read nanog.


Stop for a minute and realize that 69/8 isn't just given to web-hosters. If
that were the case, I'd agree with you. 69/8 is being given out to ISPs that
have to feed companies and end users. This has an impact on the ISPs in
question, as they cannot provide as "good" a service as their competitor
because various networks are dropping their packets to the floor.

Do I complain? Do I add my own speach to this never ending thread? Yes. I
do. I need solutions to what isn't just a technical problem, but a business
problem. If it doesn't get fixed, I will lose money.

I personally am greatful for all the suggestions, work, and communication
existing on the list and off-list concerning this problem.


Let's spin this argument on it's head for a moment and look at it from
another view point:

What you're facing, is opposition from neglegent and / or lazy network
Going up against them is always difficult. Believe me, I know.

I consider this the same view. It is difficult. My objection is to the fact
that people complain concerning the increase in posts (which I am obligated
to read almost all of them) while I'm trying to pull resources that I don't
personally possess, ie. the ideas and abilities of NANOG participators.

So, lets look at a hypothetical situation:
CNN (or someone) reports that someone within 69/8 is generating most of
the spam, or distributing most of the world's viruses, or something
equally stupid that the mass media occassionally spurts out.

Primary blocking of 69/8 is not caused from mass media. It is caused from
old router configs. Mass media might be the way out. Having said that, I do
block networks in 69/8 for spam and viruses. :slight_smile:

What do you do then? Get CNN to retract the story? That own't accomplish
anything really and we all know it.

Retractions aren't news. People don't notice them. This is news worthy, as
it affects a service that people have grown to depend on in their daily
lives. Even if it conflicts with another new story (wouldn't be the first
time), it should be put out and with enough force that every day people are
aware of it, which will mean some firewalls will get checked.

This is not a technical problem, so technical means (centralised
filtering) won't work.

The idea of Centralized filtering isn't to solve the current issue, but to
hopefully develop a solution that can help prevent this problem in the

Neither is it a policy problem, people are free to filter what they

They are allowed to, but most are filtering out of ignorance. They wouldn't
be filtering if they had the clue.

There's a very fine line between filtering a network out on purpose, and
neglegently not removing filters when space is allocated. From some view
points, they're one and the same thing.

Yes, I agree. Yet, my personal goal is to have neither where my network is
concerned. I work long hours, have my personal time interrupted (including
vacations) to maintain my network and make it the best that I can. I work
hard to please my users as well as other networks at the same time, even
though their desires often conflict. It is this very reason that the 69/8
threads interest me. I am not alone in these things. As a community, we need
to be proactive with these issues and not just reactive. Waiting for the
customer to complain is not the ideal solution. Perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps
we don't possess the intellect to solve such problems. We can't solve the
spam problem, so why should we be able to solve this?