[180121] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [SECURITY] Application layer attacks/DDoS attacks
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jim deleskie)
Mon May 25 08:49:10 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <457388feacb4414eb2d3bcd25ace27b5@mail.dessus.com>
Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 09:49:07 -0300
From: jim deleskie <deleskie@gmail.com>
To: Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf@dessus.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>, Ramy Hashish <ramy.ihashish@gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Keith,
I agree, we can't even get everyone including some LARGE ( I'll avoid
Tier's because people get stupid around that too) networks to filter
customers based on assigned netblocks.
-jim
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf@dessus.com> wrote:
>
> Without a concomitant increase in "trustworthy", assigning greater levels
> of trust is fools endeavour. Whatever this trusted network initiative is,
> I take that it was designed by fools or government (the two are usually
> indistinguishable) for the purpose of creating utterly untrustworthy
> networks.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Ramy Hashish
> > Sent: Sunday, 24 May, 2015 22:49
> > To: morrowc.lists@gmail.com; nanog@nanog.org
> > Subject: Re: [SECURITY] Application layer attacks/DDoS attacks
> >
> > The idea of restricting access to a certain content during an attack on
> > the
> > "trusted networks" only will make all interested ISPs be more "trusted"
> >
> > Ramy
> >
> > On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 5:01 AM, Christopher Morrow
> > <morrowc.lists@gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 9:12 PM, jim deleskie <deleskie@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >> However, the trusted network initiative might be a good approach to
> > > start
> > > >> influencing operators to apply anti-spoofing mechanisms.
> > > >>
> > >
> > > explain how you think the 'trusted network initiative' matters in the
> > > slightest?
> > >
> > > -chris
> > >
>
>
>
>
