[53053] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: ICANN Targets DDoS Attacks
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (H. Michael Smith, Jr.)
Tue Oct 29 10:38:47 2002
From: "H. Michael Smith, Jr." <michael@awtechnologies.com>
To: "'bob'" <bownes@web9.com>, "'fingers'" <fingers@fingers.co.za>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 10:37:48 -0500
In-Reply-To: <32BBA5238987F54A9748DBB2E904B56D4972E0@admex-03.admin2000.cau.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
If we take Marc Sachs' presentation at face-value, the Gov't is asking
us to provide such definitions (as well as anything else we can do to
help).
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of
bob
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2002 10:26 AM
To: fingers
Cc: H. Michael Smith, Jr.; nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: ICANN Targets DDoS Attacks
I would point out that if we were to define it and provide the
definition to the proper authorities, it would go a long way towards
getting a definition that makes sense.
I, (and many others here I would imagine) can help get the definition to
the right ears if ya'll come up with it.
iii
fingers wrote:
>>Agreed 100%, but Gov't (being run by lawyers) is well accustomed to
>>defining what the meaning of 'is' is. If they dictate that ISPs
employ
>>"DDoS Protection", they will define what "DDoS Protection" means 'for
>>the purposes of this policy'.
>>
>
>ah ok
>
>the point I was trying to make is, there are steps that can be taken to
>mitigate/reduce the affects of DDoS. I do not believe there is any
>complete way to "protect against a DDoS". perhaps I'm just being
pedantic.
>perhaps the clarity you mention would be a good thing for other areas
too
>:)
>
