nanog mailing list archives

Re: 143.228.0.0/16 and house.gov


From: "Suresh Ramasubramanian" <ops.lists () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 14:05:23 +0530

Some political action groups probably decided to step up the astroturfing.

You know, enter your email address here and we'll send out some
boilerplate nonsense to a bunch of congressmen and senators.

Block or firewall the worst of them, whether left or right leaning,
and I guess that should leave the servers clear for real users ...

--srs

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Ernie Rubi <ernesto () cs fiu edu> wrote:
Hi folks, just musing...

From an ops perspective, wonder just how much traffic caused:

 "This morning, our engineers sounded the alarms ... and we have installed a
digital version of a traffic cop. We enacted stopgaps that we planned for
last night. We had hoped we didn't have to."
       --Jeff Ventura, communications director for the House's chief
administrator. (from
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/30/congress.website/index.html)

Don't .govs have enough b/w or at least ability to add b/w in order to
satisfy their 'public outreach/information' role? (not a rhetorical
question...hehe)

It also seems to me that adding load balancing, firewall, throttling, etc
methods for traffic shaping might actually make the problem worse by adding
yet another layer(s) of hardware/software that may be prone to bottlenecking
or overloading.

whaddayathink?

Ernie M. Rubi
Network Engineer
AMPATH/CIARA
Florida International Univ, Miami










-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists () gmail com)


Current thread: