![nanog logo](/images/nanog-logo.png)
nanog mailing list archives
Re: UDP/123 policers & status
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 18:14:08 +0200
On 17/Mar/20 18:05, Ca By wrote:
+1 , still see, still have policers Fyi, ipv6 ntp / udp tends to have a much higher success rate getting through cgn / policers / ...
For those that have come in as attacks toward customers, we've "scrubbed" them where there has been interest. Mark.
Current thread:
- UDP/123 policers & status Jared Mauch (Mar 17)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Mark Tinka (Mar 17)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Compton, Rich A (Mar 17)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ca By (Mar 17)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Mark Tinka (Mar 17)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Steven Sommars (Mar 18)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ca By (Mar 18)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Saku Ytti (Mar 18)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Damian Menscher via NANOG (Mar 18)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Harlan Stenn (Mar 18)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Damian Menscher via NANOG (Mar 18)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ca By (Mar 17)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Steven Sommars (Mar 19)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Hal Murray (Mar 23)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ragnar Sundblad (Mar 27)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Saku Ytti (Mar 27)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ragnar Sundblad (Mar 27)