Just because a lot of his opinions are idiotic, doesn't mean this one is. Tea Party people terrify me, and I still agree with this point.

If all you see is the source in a vote, and not the individual messages or topics, you're part of the problem in our system of government.

I hear the same arguments from failing restaurants, no one complains. People don't complain about the food, they just stop going there.

What you guys don't get is we just don't bother with you at all if you don't look attractive.

Right, so you aren't competitive... This isn't hard, you just don't like the answer.

Yeah, all we have to do is kill the indigent, poor, lazy, and crippled. Imagine what a better world it would be.

History, and science, seem to think you're an idiot, and the parent is absolutely correct.

See: Tulips, Fishing, Whaling, Timber, Trapping, etc etc etc

No, you idiot, because this: http://trillastravels.files.wo...

Exactly. It's a problem of over buffering, not a lack of layering violation voodoo.

I don't know, if done right it can go really well. See Joseph Kennedy and the initial SEC. He may actually be on the up and up, only time will tell.

As if it worked any different in private industry...

The problem is you have to trust that peer to police their network.

It leads to a situation where one bad actor network with content can make it never successful.

Let me try this as simple as I can. Just because you ran BGP with your provider, does not make you a peer or transit network.

You just said default route. That is a leaf node. You're at the end of the world. You are not peering. uRPF is useful when you're a leaf. It is *completely useless as a real peer* in it's current form.

Let me illustrate this for you with a completely made up scenario: You are Telia, you peer with Abovenet in 3 places, how do you configure uRPF on those links so that it keeps spoofed packets out and doesn't break all your downstreams?

Yes obviously, which can be implemented in 2 modes: strict, which is useless as an upstream peer because you don't necessarily have best path down to them for everything you're hearing, or as loose, which is again useless as an upstream peer because you might as well turn it right off.

Dude, clearly you have no idea what you just read.

The problem with this becomes what if you're a transit provider yourself. The logistics of managing that kind of fitering suck. It's why most peers don't.

There needs to be a middle ground between loose and strict like feasable. I don't want to accept packets for any route I have, nor do I want to drop any packet that doesn't head back the same direction. For reasonable filtering at that level, it needs to be "allow any packets that should reasonably come from this peer per their advisement that I can filter". Sure you can base it of IRR or something, but it would be much more effective if this was signaled than configured.

If you don't mind, can you also pass along how utterly offensive it is that articles are being deleted that are critical of the new site. It's worse than the beta itself. This is a user content site, and has always been open forum. The very fact that criticism is being squelched makes me want to walk away in disgust.

Your users aren't idiots, stop treating us like them, or there won't be any left in a month.

Heres your feedback: The site is AWFUL.

The reason I have thus far not taking your survey is it is HOPELESSLY biased in your favor and useless.

Scrap the new site, or don't expect me to be here when it's implemented. Social media is fickle, and this site will be a myspace memory if you continue to ignore the userbase. We can always go tolerate reddit for a while until something else takes it's place. I've been coming here for 10 years, but this may end it for me.