nanog mailing list archives
Re: ddos attack blog
From: John <jschiel () flowtools net>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 11:47:53 -0700
On 02/13/2014 10:06 AM, Cb B wrote:
Good write up, includes name and shame for AT&T Wireless, IIJ, OVH, DTAG and others http://blog.cloudflare.com/technical-details-behind-a-400gbps-ntp-amplification-ddos-attack Standard plug for http://openntpproject.org/ and http://openresolverproject.org/ and bcp38 , please fix/help. For those of you paying attention to the outage list, this is a pretty big deal that has had daily ramification for some very big networks https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2014-February/date.html In general, i think UDP is doomed to be blocked and rate limited -- tragedy of the commons. But, it would be nice if folks would just fix the root of the issue so the rest of us don't have go there...
UDP won't be blocked. There are some vendors that have their own hidden protocol inside UDP packets to control and communicate with their devices.
Thinking on it again, maybe blocking UDP isn't all that bad. Would force the vendors to not 'hide' their protocol.
--John
Regards, CB
Current thread:
- ddos attack blog Cb B (Feb 13)
- Re: ddos attack blog Jared Mauch (Feb 13)
- Re: ddos attack blog Paul Ferguson (Feb 13)
- Re: ddos attack blog John (Feb 13)
- Re: ddos attack blog Jared Mauch (Feb 13)
- Re: ddos attack blog Mark Tinka (Feb 14)
- Re: ddos attack blog Wayne E Bouchard (Feb 14)
- Permitting spoofed traffic [Was: Re: ddos attack blog] Paul Ferguson (Feb 14)
- Re: Permitting spoofed traffic [Was: Re: ddos attack blog] Joe Provo (Feb 14)
- Re: Permitting spoofed traffic [Was: Re: ddos attack blog] Paul Ferguson (Feb 14)
- Re: Permitting spoofed traffic [Was: Re: ddos attack blog] Jeff Kell (Feb 14)
- Re: ddos attack blog Jared Mauch (Feb 13)
- Message not available
- Re: Permitting spoofed traffic [Was: Re: ddos attack blog] Larry Sheldon (Feb 14)
- Re: Permitting spoofed traffic [Was: Re: ddos attack blog] Paul Ferguson (Feb 14)
- Re: ddos attack blog John (Feb 14)
