[47797] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Arbor Networks DoS defense product
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Pete Kruckenberg)
Wed May 15 01:29:43 2002
Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 23:29:09 -0600 (MDT)
From: Pete Kruckenberg <pete@kruckenberg.com>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.40.0205150020200.24941-100000@clifden.donelan.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0205142253130.19988-100000@minot.kruckenberg.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Wed, 15 May 2002, Sean Donelan wrote:
> Telus has gone first, and announced it is using Arbor's
> products across its backbone network.
> http://www.eweek.com/article/0,3658,s=720&a=26867,00.asp
>
> People have been trying the products for a while. Does
> Arbor Networks really have an answer to DoS, or does it
> still need a little longer in the oven.
Have any large networks gathered statistics on how much
traffic DDoS/DoS/DRDoS attacks consume on an average day?
The attacks I have been able to detect represent around
10-15% of my traffic on an on-going basis.
I'm curious about the business case for investing in DoS
defense mechanisms. DoS traffic is boosting service provider
revenues through increased customer bandwidth usage. So the
investment in defense mechanisms like Arbor would have to
replace or increase that revenue. Will these issues inhibit
wide-spread implementation of DoS defenses?
Pete.
