 |
 |
I wonder if the intent, to borrow your you're analogy, is to allow each person coming to the potluck to make the decision to not eat one particular dish... s *Shaun Carlson*Senior Manager of Information Technology | Arvig ph: (218) 346-8673 | em: [log in to unmask] On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Levi Pederson < [log in to unmask]> wrote: > I will not be able to attend the UG meeting today but I would still like > to respond to the discussion that is to take place during the meeting. > > This topic at hand is the decision to implement Community Strings in the > Exchange. There have been a couple responses on this and the primary > reasons stated is based on security from my understanding. > > I am opposed to this implementation. I believe the very idea of > segregation in an Internet Exchange undermines the primary purpose of the > exchange. We are here to make the internet better not honeycombed. > > The idea of segregation based on security is a bit odd to me. An > allegorical situation would be the following : Invite multiple people over > for a pot-luck dinner (BYO-Dish). Have someones kid break one said dish. > Then have someone take ALL the food, secure in their house and grant > access/monitor to specific pot-luck goers based entirely on their specific > point of view. > > This process I feel will create too much segregation and deviate rather > far from the ideological goal of the exchange. > > My thoughts on responses: > > 1. How can we continue to provide benefits and capabilities to new > members or bgp sessions gone awry? > a. We are currently implementing great layer 2 defenses and that is > a great start. > b. Create a list of best practices and configuration examples for > connecting to the exchange as a community. > > Forgive the long post. Just my 2 cents on table tonight. > > Thank you, >