[61344] in North American Network Operators' Group
Fw: GLBX ICMP rate limiting (was RE: Tier-1 without their own backbone?)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Gordon)
Thu Aug 28 09:49:41 2003
From: "Gordon" <gstewart@ctccom.net>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 09:43:04 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Of the DDOS attacks I have had to deal with in the past year I have seen
none which were icmp based.
As attacks evolve and transform are we really to believe that rate limiting
icmp will have some value in the attacks of tomorrow?
-Gordon
>
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, jlewis@lewis.org wrote:
>
> > We have a similarly sized connection to MFN/AboveNet, which I won't
> > recommend at this time due to some very questionable null routing
they're
> > doing (propogating routes to destinations, then bitbucketing traffic
sent
> > to them) which is causing complaints from some of our customers and
> > forcing us to make routing adjustments as the customers notice
> > MFN/AboveNet has broken our connectivity to these destinations.
>
> We've noticed that one of our upstreams (Global Crossing) has introduced
> ICMP rate limiting 4/5 days ago. This means that any traceroutes/pings
> through them look awful (up to 60% apparent packet loss). After
> contacting their NOC, they said that the directive to install the ICMP
> rate limiting was from the Homeland Security folks and that they would not
> remove them or change the rate at which they limit in the foreseeable
> future.
>
> What are other transit providers doing about this or is it just GLBX?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rich
>
