North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: CCO/cisco.com issues.
Charles, which doesn't help you much today.Let's add a very important line: "Then They Came for the OC-3 or smaller connections and I did not speak out because I run fat OC-12 - OC-48 pipes" I've seen attacks of around a Gbit/s bandwidth. So a OC-48 is already in danger. The OC-12 is useless. And _of course_ the top providers have OC-192 "everywhere" ... . It's my guess that the "top providers" that ignore cries for help becauseand get complains from customers because the Internet access doesn't work as promised. Ignoring this in a competitive market is no option. A least not for a longer time. What is underestimated is the difficulty to detect an attack and the details of it. Fortunately tools like Arbor or Riverhead exist meanwhile but even then it's often reactive for smaller customers. From my impression "top providers" spent the money for such tools although there is no direct/obvious revenue impact (read: gain). I would name this a responsible behavior for commercial companies. There is cooperation. Maybe not that much on list like NANOG but Hank mentioned already a non-public list which succeeded in building the trust to cooperate with other providers. Without the risk to see your issues on news.com the next day.I hope we don't have to wait until that time comes around to figure out how to cooperate. Just because it doesn't appear on NANOG doesn't mean nobody takes care :-) Regards, Marc -- Marc Binderberger <[email protected]> Powered by *BSD ;-)
|