[55178] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Level3 routing issues?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher L. Morrow)
Sat Jan 25 16:42:44 2003
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 19:53:54 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <chris@UU.NET>
To: "K. Scott Bethke" <kbethke@thruport.com>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <07a401c2c499$d9e5c670$9b60ed40@gooportojsdu8d>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003, K. Scott Bethke wrote:
>
> BIll,
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Woodcock" <woody@pch.net>
> > I'd agree with it. Except the herds of losers who still buy exploding
> > crap from Vendor M don't seem to be thinning themselves out quickly
>
> dude, the Exploding Cars are so much easier to drive than the ones from
> Vendor L. (tic)
unfortunately (being a vendor L user myself) you must admit that these too
have problems :( (at times)
>
> > enough. Maybe they're sexually attractive to each other, and reproduce
> > before their stupidity kills them. That would be unfortunate. Or maybe
> > it's just that none of this computer stuff actually matters, so exploding
> > crap isn't actually fatal. Maybe that's it.
>
> I think it sucks that they are exploding on MY highway.
>
> With that in mind is it time yet to talk about solutions to problems like
> this from the network point of view? Sure its easy to put up access list's
> when needed but I have 100megs available to me on egress and I was trying to
> push 450megs. Is there anything protocol, vendor specific or otherwise that
> will not allow rogue machines to at will take up 100% of available
> resources? I know extreme networks has the concept of Max Port utilization
> on thier switches, will this help? Suggestions?
>
Keep in mind that these problems aren't from 'well behaved' hosts, and
'well behaved' hosts normally listen to ECN/tcp-window/Red/WRED....
classic DoS attack scenario. :(
