[45194] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: DNS DOS increasing?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Stephen Griffin)
Mon Jan 21 18:52:24 2002
Message-Id: <200201212350.SAA13327@elektra.ultra.net>
In-Reply-To: <171DAAD54475984F8F41345A0945DF9C39ED4E@hqexchange.presidio.com> from James Smith at "Jan 21, 2002 12:36:43 pm"
To: jsmith@PRESIDIO.com (James Smith)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 18:50:07 -0500 (EST)
From: Stephen Griffin <stephen.griffin@rcn.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
In the referenced message, James Smith said:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: E.B. Dreger [mailto:eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net]
> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 12:08 PM
> To: James Smith
> Cc: nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: RE: DNS DOS increasing?
>
> BGP isn't that expensive.
> ----
>
> For some, it is a cost that can be mitigated by "workaround" technologies
> that are cheaper.
>
> Of course, it could be argued that if you're not willing to make the
> investment to do it the BGP way, you don't really need it bad enough.
>
> Enter the salesman who is heard to tell his prospects "...you don't have the
> cost of BGP, you get the same effect as BGP, and you don't even have to tell
> your ISP!".
With the added benefit of not increasing the routing table size. The downfall
is (potentially) increased address consumption (perhaps mitigated in that
small entities doubling a /28 is still better than lying cheating and stealing
for a "large" PI or PA block).
> James H. Smith II NNCDS NNCSE
> Systems Engineer
> The Presidio Corporation
>
> By the way, I speak only for myself, which gets me in enough trouble...
