[94773] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Hackers hit key Internet traffic computers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (virendra rode //)
Wed Feb 7 15:25:55 2007
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 12:24:59 -0800
From: virendra rode // <virendra.rode@gmail.com>
Reply-To: virendra.rode@gmail.com
To: Douglas Otis <dotis@mail-abuse.org>
Cc: Jeff Kell <jeff-kell@utc.edu>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <63C9F20F-CA1C-49B7-A026-A535F1BACE51@mail-abuse.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Douglas Otis wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 7, 2007, at 6:27 AM, Jeff Kell wrote:
>
>>
>> Alexander Harrowell wrote:
>>>
>>> It was clear from the highly reliable index I call the "Nanogdex"
>>> that nothing was seriously amiss.
>>
>> Yes, but it got so much bloody press that ambitious copycats can't be
>> too far behind.
>
> When 2 of 13 root systems are affected (>90% loss), how many systems
> will withstand such an attack when targeted lower within the hierarchy?
> FWIW, the attack rates did not seem that high.
>
> -Doug
>
- ------------------------------------
On the same note and this just an observation, I hear two thoughts, some
talk not using anycast and then there are others who stand their ground
about anycast deployment.
Looking at these attacks, F in particular, if my memory serves me
correct, there are 35 f-root anycast nodes deployed. Maybe this helped
in some respect.
Then again, I like to see what kind of analysis comes out from the
collected data.
regards,
/virendra
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFFyjWbpbZvCIJx1bcRAipMAJ9gNkyYS0BTR4jVrBP8PiZ9CyILDACcC8Jx
MNiY9T6Wzi60KtgaK3qLqnM=
=kJk7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
