Re: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Abuse in general
- To: "gnso-ff-pdp-May08@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-ff-pdp-May08@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-ff-pdp-may08] Abuse in general
- From: Dave Piscitello <dave.piscitello@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 07:57:49 -0700
This is a very valid point and exposes a shortcoming in our collective
We are guilty of only identifying characteristics of "fast flux", The Bad
By having only this definition, the implication is "if it's not
characteristically fast flux, then it's A Good Thing".
So, it would be useful to create an item list of bunny rabbit networks.
I'll propose some characteristics to get us started:
* manipulates TTL values to achieve resiliencey and high availability
* runs name and other Internet services, with authorization, on owner- or
* uses licensed software installed with informed consent by owner-operators
* uses address blocks assigned to the registrant, registrant's
Perhaps we can continue this on the phone call. See you there.
On 8/8/08 10:42 AM, "George Kirikos" <gk@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Dave Piscitello
> I'm OK with the bunny rabbit thing.
> All I ask is that when you use fast flux, you use it in the context of the
> definition we've adopted.
Agreed. I'll do so from now on, but as the chronology demonstrates,
there's been a void in describing the non-criminal aspects, and
hopefully now that we have a proper term to call the underlying
technology (content agnostic) we can avoid confusion (although some
people will still refer to fast flux using a broader definition; just