nanog mailing list archives
RE: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS
From: "Lumenello, Jason" <jlumenello () xo com>
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 16:15:44 -0500
XO set up a similar customer community last year for our customers to trigger their own black hole at our edge. There is no such thing as an original idea. :) This "promised response" probably means if you press 3 on your phone, you will get a CSR to open a ticket within 15 minutes. Sounds like nice marketing. Jason
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu] On Behalf
Of
Stephen Perciballi Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 12:25 PM To: Andy Ellifson Cc: nanog () merit edu Subject: Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS To the best of my knowledge, MCI/UUNET ~was~ the first to implement
this.
I've been using it for well over a year now. The community is 701:9999. Any route you tag with that community gets dropped accross the entire 701 edge. Feel free to contact support and tell
them
you want to setup the blackhole community if you are having any troubles. [Wed, Mar 03, 2004 at 08:34:00AM -0800] Andy Ellifson Inscribed these words...When I first saw this post I thought that MCI/UU.Net implemented
some
DDOSBGP community strings like CW implemented a month ago. If only all
of
myupstreams would have this type of BGP Community string my life would
be
madeeasier. Here is the customer release letter from from CW dated
Januray
23,2004: Dear Customer, If you have received this email, you are either a direct customer of AS3561, (i.e. you have registered a route object for a customer ofAS3561),or are listed in the maintainer of a customer of AS3561. AS3561 has implemented a blackhole/DDoS community string based
solution
toaid customers in the mitigation of DoS attacks. If you are currentlyrunningBGP with us, you will be able to use this feature. If you advertise a prefix (route) to us with the community string 3561:666, we will NULL route or 'blackhole' all traffic destined to
that
prefix. The prefixes accepted are based on the current prefix-listgeneratedfor you. Instead of doing exact match filtering, we will accept anyprefix(more "specific") within your address block(s). e.g. if you have 192.168.0.0/16 registered, we will accept 192.168.0.0/16 upto /32 aslong asthe 3561:666 community string is attached. Please ensure you are configured to send community strings andunderstandthe impact of errant advertisements. Diligence should be used when administrating this feature. Once the prefix is received and
propagated
within AS3561, all traffic destined to the prefix will be discarded
and
theblackholing of traffic will continue as long as DDoS community
string is
being advertised. Neither Cable & Wireless nor AS3561 will be heldliableor responsible for customers who errantly advertise prefixes with
the
blackhole community string. If you wish to utilize this feature, you can verify our acceptance
of
theadvertised prefix by querying the AS3561 route server located at http://lg.cw.net. Please remember, we require you to complete a priority one incidentreportat http://www.security.cw.net (Report an Incident) and include
details
of theattack. An email describing further details of the attack can be
sent to
security () cw net, please include the incident report number in thesubject toassist in the tracking and documentation of the incident. This willensurethe attack is properly administrated handled by our Security and
Legal
Groups. --- John Obi <dalnetuzer () yahoo com> wrote:Hello Nanogers! I'm happy to see this, and I hope C&W, Verio, and Level3 ..etc
will do
thesame! MCI/WorldCom Monday unveiled a new service level agreement (SLA)
to
help IPservices customers thwart and defend against Internet viruses andthreats.http://informationweek.securitypipeline.com/news/18201396 It's the right time before it's too late! Regards, -J --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you're looking for faster.-- Stephen (routerg) irc.dks.ca
Current thread:
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS, (continued)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Erik Haagsman (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Paul G (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Randy Bush (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Stephen Perciballi (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Andy Ellifson (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Stephen Perciballi (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Danny McPherson (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Rob Thomas (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Stephen Perciballi (Mar 03)
- RE: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Douglas.Dever (Mar 03)
- RE: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Terranson, Alif (Mar 03)
- RE: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Lumenello, Jason (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS james (Mar 03)
- RE: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Michael Hallgren (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Stephen J. Wilcox (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Patrick W . Gilmore (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Stephen J. Wilcox (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Patrick W . Gilmore (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS David Barak (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS James (Mar 04)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS james (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Mark Kasten (Mar 03)
- Re: UUNet Offer New Protection Against DDoS Deepak Jain (Mar 03)