[158689] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Solutions for DoS & DDoS
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steve)
Thu Dec 6 15:53:25 2012
In-Reply-To: <mailman.9379.1354821712.12739.nanog@nanog.org>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
From: Steve <angst1974@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 15:53:07 -0500
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
The ideal solution is a carrier that has its own true DDoS mitigation platfo=
rm, and does not rely on black hole routing . Have the carrier handle the th=
e large bulk flood attacks, then have your own prem base mitigation platform=
take care of the more application specific attacks that get through .
This represents the best solution , and also the most expensive . So it may n=
ot work for a non profit.=20
This Email was sent from Steve's iPad
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 09:51:21 -0800
> From: Mike Gatti <ekim.ittag@gmail.com>
> To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
> Subject: Solutions for DoS & DDoS
> Message-ID: <0D89D80C-D288-402F-8723-B837EA52313C@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii
>=20
> Hello Everyone,=20
>=20
> I'm assisting a non-profit organization to research solutions to secure th=
eir network from DOS/DDOS attacks. So far we have gone the route of discussi=
ng with their ISP's to see what solutions they have to offer, believing that=
the carriers are better positioned to block the attack from the source.=20
>=20
> I wanted to get the lists thoughts on our approach going the carrier route=
and/or hear about successful implementation of other solutions.=20
>=20
> Thanks,
> --
> Michael Gatti =20
> 949.371.5474
> (UTC -8)
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> ------------------------------
>=20
>=20
> End of NANOG Digest, Vol 59, Issue 24
> *************************************
