North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: CCO/cisco.com issues.

  • From: Marc Binderberger
  • Date: Tue Oct 07 18:53:07 2003

Charles,

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"
which doesn't help you much today.
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 because
they can sink the traffic (and bill for it)
and 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.


  I hope we don't have to wait until that
time comes around to figure out how to cooperate.
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.

Just because it doesn't appear on NANOG doesn't mean nobody takes care :-)


Regards, Marc
--
Marc Binderberger <[email protected]> Powered by *BSD ;-)