nanog mailing list archives
Re: ddos attack blog
From: Hal Murray <hmurray () megapathdsl net>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 15:00:34 -0800
I was being a bit extreme, I don't expect UDP to be blocked and there are valid uses for NTP and it needs to pass. Can you imagine the trading servers not having access to NTP?
Sure. They could setup internal NTP servers listening to GPS. Would it be as good overall as using external servers? Probably not, but it might be good enough. I doubt if it would be very high on any trading floors list of nasty problems. They could arrange to poke holes through the generic UDP block - whitelist the few known cases where UDP traffic is expected. Would it be a pain to administer? Probably, but I'll bet it could be made to work. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam.
Current thread:
- Re: ddos attack blog, (continued)
- Re: ddos attack blog Jared Mauch (Feb 13)
- Re: ddos attack blog Mark Tinka (Feb 14)
- Re: ddos attack blog Wayne E Bouchard (Feb 14)
- Permitting spoofed traffic [Was: Re: ddos attack blog] Paul Ferguson (Feb 14)
- Re: Permitting spoofed traffic [Was: Re: ddos attack blog] Joe Provo (Feb 14)
- Re: Permitting spoofed traffic [Was: Re: ddos attack blog] Paul Ferguson (Feb 14)
- Re: Permitting spoofed traffic [Was: Re: ddos attack blog] Jeff Kell (Feb 14)
- Re: ddos attack blog Jared Mauch (Feb 13)
- Message not available
- Re: Permitting spoofed traffic [Was: Re: ddos attack blog] Larry Sheldon (Feb 14)
- Re: Permitting spoofed traffic [Was: Re: ddos attack blog] Paul Ferguson (Feb 14)
- Re: ddos attack blog John (Feb 14)
- Re: ddos attack blog joel jaeggli (Feb 14)