Re: [Idr] Vendor Defaults (was Re: Review of draft-ietf-large-community-06.txt)

Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> Mon, 07 November 2016 12:23 UTC

Return-Path: <jared@puck.nether.net>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A4E712953A for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 04:23:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rUtI9PW609Fy for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 04:22:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from puck.nether.net (puck.nether.net [IPv6:2001:418:3f4::5]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BE82129DF4 for <idr@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 04:22:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2603:3015:3603:8e00:dce:b8ba:3538:f68b] (unknown [IPv6:2603:3015:3603:8e00:dce:b8ba:3538:f68b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by puck.nether.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 557B1540C41; Mon, 7 Nov 2016 07:22:47 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\))
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <5BD3C90E-CC0E-42D2-9ACD-5787FC75BF0A@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 07:22:46 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8035244C-BC7D-4756-88FF-6C93330291B3@puck.nether.net>
References: <CAH1iCiq6jNtnkta0Bt952EQ9zOKSGt=_cCySsT5XuOKuHYO2nQ@mail.gmail.com> <86860386-9C2B-4BD5-B457-2A6DA5446CF3@cisco.com> <20161106040849.GB18931@shrubbery.net> <5BD3C90E-CC0E-42D2-9ACD-5787FC75BF0A@cisco.com>
To: "Jakob Heitz (jheitz)" <jheitz@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3251)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/-Ew4nE0AL7c48ZgvzmFuWrIh2Hk>
Cc: John Heasley <heas@shrubbery.net>, "idr@ietf.org" <idr@ietf.org>, Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Vendor Defaults (was Re: Review of draft-ietf-large-community-06.txt)
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2016 12:23:00 -0000

> On Nov 6, 2016, at 1:43 AM, Jakob Heitz (jheitz) <jheitz@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
>  it would break many existing deployments.

I think you mean bring security to these deployments.

Advocating for this is like advocating to keep ip directed-broadcast or open relays on the internet.  It’s a security risk to the ecosystem imposed by a vendor blindly saying “change is hard, my customers can’t handle the technology they use”.

- Jared