North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: Top AS Offenders causing RFC-1918 DNS traffic
It would not surprise me that pacbell/swbell aka SBC and Time Warner/Roadrunner are among the biggest offenders here. A significant portion of their customers are DSL/cable mode subscribers. Since Win2k and I assume XP both attempt to perform dynamic dns updates, hosts behind NAT, windows will happily send the update requests up the dns tree as far as it can. When @Home was around, the primary name servers for home.com used to see update attempts constantly. Paul Vixie has posted in here statistics about the root levels getting hammered by such update attempts in the past. Any technical solution performed at the network level would be a bubble gum and duct tape attempt to fix what was poorly engineered at the software level. Since it's unlikely Microsoft will issue some sort of fix to the problem. Perhaps IANA should set the name servers to an address within each particular block, that would at least keep the traffic local to the organization, and not hammer larger internet infrastructure name servers. Sameer > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of > Peter Salus > Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2002 2:54 PM > To: John M. Brown > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: Top AS Offenders causing RFC-1918 DNS traffic > > > > > It seems to me that some folks may not realize who owns > John Brown's 5 AS villains. > > 4134 is Chinanet > 3352 is Ibernet > 7132 is Southwestern Bell > > and > > 5673 ) > 5676 ) are both SBC > > As Southwestern Bell is a part of SBC, it looks like > SBC is a major villain where RFC-1918 DNS traffic is > concerned. > > Peter
|