[20625] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Encouraging smurf-amp measurements
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard Steenbergen)
Mon Oct 19 12:36:56 1998
From: "Richard Steenbergen" <humble@lightning.net>
To: "Mark R. Lindsey" <mark@vielle.datasys.net>, <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 00:09:19 -0400
>This is encouraging news:
>
>I ran a scan for smurf-amps of /24s in 200/8 through 210/8 in late
>July that yielded 30,083 networks that returned duplicate
>echo-replies. Today, I rescanned those networks, and found that of the
>original 30k, only 21,255 returned duplicates -- that's a 29% drop.
>
>Whether it means that more networks overall are properly configured, or
>that different networks are misconfigured, I know not. Optimistically,
>I'd like to guess that the former is true, but a complete scan would
>be necessary to know.
Its an actual across-the-board drop. If you eliminate the puny bcasts (less
then 10 dupes) the numbers are even better. I've got a project setup to
automatically scan everything in the bgp routing table, grab contact
information for the UPLINK (99.9% of those bcasts remaining are ones with
dud contact info), send out aggregated emails to said uplinks, and maintain
a database of useful statistics. The only thing I'm waiting on is certain
persons coughREIDcough coughSTEVEcough to get off their arses and finish
what they said they would a couple months ago. =)
--
Richard Steenbergen <humble@lightning.net> http://www.bitchx.com/~humble
humble@EFnet hkp://keys.pgp.com/humble@lightning.net PGP KeyID: 0x21581362
PGP key fingerprint: 7552 6AB2 B9C7 5A1B F1B6 8EA3 DFCF 793D 2158 1362
"I tried sniffing Coke once, but the ice cubes got stuck in my nose!"
