<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font size="-1"><font face="Arial">I am now providing a link to the
draft RFC as it gives the issue legitimacy in some cases.<br>
The good news is all the small ISPs I have contacted have
resolved the issue within 24 hours. <br>
<br>
The only Australian provider left to deal with is Three. Parts
of the the network are unaffected which is highly frustrating.<br>
(They have two (or more) different networks running side by
side, perhaps a side effect of the Vodafone merger)<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Martin<br>
StudioCoast<br>
</font></font><br>
On 15/08/2011 8:09 PM, Terry Manderson wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:E95F9D65-1F97-4266-9DFA-F87A891DA41C@terrym.net"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
On 15/08/2011, at 4:49 PM, Tom Lanyon wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Hi Terry,
The real challenge is not in documenting the address space which should (not) be filtered, but being able to reach and convince those who are currently filtering these prefixes to stop doing so.
I'd imagine that the people in charge of networks who are currently erroneously blocking the space or have outdated WHOIS info and are unable to be contacted, are also likely to not follow the latest RFC publications or be on lists such as this...
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Hi Tom,
There is no silver bullet, no doubt you have realised this, since network operators like their practices are many and varied and all beat to various tones of different drums. Documentation itself is not a challenge, a chore perhaps, so you are quite correct that the fun and exciting part is to get operators to update their posture without boring them to tears in a presentation about updating your filters and WHOIS information. Gosh darn, been there done that ;) and in some cases some people CAN'T be told - they live only on a self discovery road.
It's likely that many of these people who block address space in active allocation by the RIRs won't follow any operator list, nor read an RFC even if it has (ascii) porn in it. What I (and others) have noticed is that network hardware (vendor) companies have a swag of people who do read RFCs and are pretty prompt in getting the documentation for their products and their various howto's updated. This has a nice domino effect as many (not all) of these outdated_filter_list_people do read their favourite vendor's docco and therefore will eventually fix it under the "oh - look what I discovered, quick everyone applaud me!" modus operandi.
Does that help a person experiencing this problem right now? Probably not. But if you do manage to get hold of someone at one of these places sometimes a well phrased polite discussion that they aren't following IETF RFC/Standards has more 'take' than a 'you are blocking my traffic'.
Again.. No silver bullet.. Welcome to the human experience.
Cheers
Terry
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>