[169281] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NTP DRDos Blog post
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Thu Feb 20 12:18:46 2014
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <1A823676-45C9-471F-A785-3753BA272EC0@arbor.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:17:51 -0500
To: "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobbins@arbor.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Feb 20, 2014, at 11:34 AM, Dobbins, Roland <rdobbins@arbor.net> =
wrote:
>=20
> On Feb 20, 2014, at 11:23 PM, Brian Rak <brak@gameservers.com> wrote:
>=20
>> That's not a new term.
>=20
> It isn't used by folks involved in operational security. It's a =
marketing term.
>=20
I'll split the difference, folks in operational security dislike the =
term as they
feel it's inaccurate. They tend to think it's marketing vs operational =
related.
Reflection attacks are considered a sub-type of DoS/DDoS and do not =
require a new
term. It's the same problem folks have with absolute terms like =
"Unlimited Data"
with the asterisk.
Can I direct the knife-fights about that part off-list? :) (and =
preferably exclude me,
i get enough email).
- jared=
