[10708] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NSPs and filters
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Pokorney)
Sat Jul 12 10:39:24 1997
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 10:28:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Dave Pokorney <dp@calypso.nerdc.ufl.edu>
Reply-To: Dave Pokorney <dp@calypso.nerdc.ufl.edu>
To: Jon Lewis <jlewis@inorganic5.fdt.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.970711213404.600C-100000@inorganic5.fdt.net>
Jon,
From provider side of things they have more packets to fly than that of
FDT. The more one has to filter, the less cpu there is to route packets..
I suspect that this may be the only cause...
regards,
-dave
On Fri, 11 Jul 1997, Jon Lewis wrote:
> Why is it that the NSPs I've encountered refuse to do any sort of sanity
> filtering on their customer connections? i.e. If UUNet knows that FDT has
> only 205.229.48/20 and 208.215.0/20, why should they let me send traffic
> through their network with random source addresses?
>
> FDT has been the target of forged source address UDP attacks for the past
> 2 days. It's all being stopped at our router that takes our UUNet T1, but
> the extra T1 traffic is causing UUNet's usually unreliable network to be
> even less reliable, and we've lost connectivity to UUNet several times
> this evening.
>
> 5 minute input rate 1326000 bits/sec, 318 packets/sec
> 5 minute output rate 469000 bits/sec, 286 packets/sec
>
> PUNet suppost says there's nothing they can do, and that I should talk to
> their security people about buying a firewall for FDT on monday...like a
> firewall on our side of the T1 is going to do us a lot of good....
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Jon Lewis <jlewis@fdt.net> | Unsolicited commercial e-mail will
> Network Administrator | be proof-read for $199/message.
> Florida Digital Turnpike |
> ________Finger jlewis@inorganic5.fdt.net for PGP public key_______
>
>
