[31469] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: netscan.org update
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brian Wallingford)
Sun Sep 24 20:35:23 2000
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 20:29:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brian Wallingford <brian@meganet.net>
To: Bill Woodcock <woody@zocalo.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.96.1000924135820.6250D-100000@secure>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10009242018150.7717-100000@cerise>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
I've only quickly skimmed the messages leading up to this, so I may be
reiterating others' sentiments; but, I'd expect that most amplifiers are
hosted by a relatively small number of ASNs. As such, filtering of those
AS' may bring about a wake-up call.
Considering this, filtering by prefix, while certainly effective, could
also be very personnel/cpu intensive, especially when targeting small
blocks.
Policy-routing to null0 will impact your own border performance, which
(even if negligible) rubs me the wrong way principle-wise.
I'd lean toward AS filtering, though such would require widespread
implementation to be effective.
This is sounding an awful lot like other "social/political" Internet
issues, isn't it? :)
cheers,
-brian
On Sun, 24 Sep 2000, Bill Woodcock wrote:
:
: It's sounding like what we're working our way around to is that two
: separate BGP feeds would be needed:
:
: 1) One with an announcement of all of the /32s which are broadcast
: addresses of amplifier networks, so that operators can route traffic
: _destined_ for those /32s to Null0.
:
: 2) Another with an announcement of all of the whole blocks of amplifier
: addresses, so that operators who choose to can create policy-routes which
: specify that traffic _originating_ from those addresses (and which are
: _also_ ICMP echo-replies, perhaps) gets policy routed to Null0.
:
: I'd guess that feed #1 would be an easy sell, and that many fewer people
: would use feed #2 as well, but both seem like good ideas.
