|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re[4]: SYN floods (was: does history repeat itself?)
John,
This sort of feature could be easily added into a NAS, but I
question your implementation details. If this filter was turned on by
default, then this could "break" other types of services which may
require source ip addresses other than the one which was negotiated to
the user.
This would mean that a customer could perform a flash upgrade and
find that their service no longer operates (a technical support
nightmare). Would you be willing to consider such a feature where it
would have to be enabled (and is disabled by default) and a very well
explained document with the release notes to service providers
advising them of the risk of not enabling this switch??
Pat R. Calhoun e-mail: [email protected]
Project Engineer - Lan Access R&D phone: (847) 933-5181
US Robotics Access Corp.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Re[2]: SYN floods (was: does history repeat itself?)
Author: "John G. Scudder" <[email protected]> at Internet
Date: 9/12/96 2:33 PM
At 1:44 PM -0400 9/12/96, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
>I agree with you completely -- sort of. Only problem is there are
>thought to be some 3,000 dial access providers. Many of them barely
>know what a TCP SYN is, let alone why they need to block ones with
>random source addresses and how. Unless of course you are
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>volunteering to explain it and help them. Thanks in advance. :-)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Curtis, this is a great point. USR and other NAS vendors are actually in a
great position to do exactly this, by changing their boxes to block random
addresses *by default* on dial-up ports. This is of course exactly the
point Vadim and others keep making, and of course as they point out there
ought to be a knob to disable it if desired.
Insofar as guys who "barely know what a TCP SYN is" are unlikely to twist
the knobs, defaulting filtering to "block spoofed addresses" seems like the
best and maybe only way to get them to do it.
How about it, USR &al?
--John
--
John Scudder email: [email protected]
Internet Engineering Group, LLC phone: (313) 669-8800
122 S. Main, Suite 280 fax: (313) 669-8661
Ann Arbor, MI 41804 www: http://www.ieng.com
Received: from usr.com (mailgate.usr.com) by robogate2.usr.com with SMTP (IMA Internet Exchange 2.02 Enterprise) id 23856580; Thu, 12 Sep 96 13:28:40 -0500 Received: from syzygy.ieng.com by usr.com (8.7.5/3.1.090690-US Robotics) id NAA19118; Thu, 12 Sep 1996 13:31:59 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [198.108.88.23] (pm049-22.dialip.mich.net [198.108.88.42]) by syzygy.ieng.com (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA00770; Thu, 12 Sep 1996 14:33:17 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <[email protected][198.108.88.23]> In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> References: Your message of "Mon, 09 Sep 1996 13:19:18 CDT." <[email protected]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 14:33:52 -0400 To: [email protected] From: "John G. Scudder" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Re[2]: SYN floods (was: does history repeat itself?) Cc: [email protected] (Pat Calhoun), [email protected] |