On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 2:08 PM, Shaun Carlson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
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...sShaun Carlson
Senior Manager of Information Technology | ArvigOn 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,
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link:
http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1