[163646] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Blocking TCP flows?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Phil Fagan)
Thu Jun 13 16:48:45 2013
In-Reply-To: <CAL9jLaZaPVmYrt_1tBn9ekRWX-=z1SE8Xu6tCb16wTsW6E8Z0A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phil Fagan <philfagan@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 14:47:58 -0600
To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Wustrow <ewust@umich.edu>, nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I didn't think the bus up to the FGPA was very beefy...wouldn't you need to
send flows up there off the data-plane for inspection?
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com
> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Eric Wustrow <ewust@umich.edu> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm looking for a way to block individual TCP flows (5-tuple) on a 1-10
> gbps
> > link, with new blocked flows being dropped within a millisecond or so of
> > being
> > added. I've been looking into using OpenFlow on an HP Procurve, but I
> don't
> > know much in this area, so I'm looking for better alternatives.
> >
>
> this sounds like a job for the arista box with the FGPA onboard, no?
>
>
> > Ideally, such a device would add minimal latency (many/expandable CAM
> > entries?), can handle many programatically added flows (hundreds per
> > second),
> > and would be deployable in a production network (fails in bypass mode).
> Are
> > there any
> > COTS devices I should be looking at? Or is the market for this all under
> > the table to
> > pro-censorship governments?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > -Eric
>
>
--
Phil Fagan
Denver, CO
970-480-7618
