nanog mailing list archives
Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed.
From: goemon () anime net
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 22:58:28 -0700 (PDT)
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009, William Pitcock wrote:
On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 20:05 -0700, Shon Elliott wrote:There has been alot of customers on our network who were complaining about ACK scan reports coming from 207.126.64.181. We had no choice but to block that single IP until the attacks let up. It was a decision I made with the gentleman that owns the colo facility currently hosts 4chan. There was no other way around it. I'm sure AT&T is probably blocking it for the same reason. 4chan has been under attack for over 3 weeks, the attacks filling up an entire GigE. If you want to blame anyone, blame the script kiddies who pull this kind of stunt....have you ever heard of forged packet headers? Just saying.
everyone who *still* refuses to block spoofing should think hard about it. you know who you are. -Dan
Current thread:
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed., (continued)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. Shon Elliott (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. jamie (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. Shon Elliott (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. Seth Mattinen (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. Shon Elliott (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. jamie (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. John Bambenek (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. jamie (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. jamie (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. Jon Lewis (Jul 27)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. Shon Elliott (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. goemon (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. chris rollin (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. Shon Elliott (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. chris rollin (Jul 27)
- RE: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. Tim Burke (Jul 27)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. John Bambenek (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. chris rollin (Jul 26)
- Re: AT&T. Layer 6-8 needed. John Bambenek (Jul 26)