nanog mailing list archives
Re: UDP/123 policers & status
From: Saku Ytti <saku () ytti fi>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 19:54:00 +0200
On Fri, 27 Mar 2020 at 19:48, Ragnar Sundblad <ragge () kth se> wrote:
Is this really what the ISP community wants - to kill off port 123, and force NTP to move to random ports?
Make NST attenuation vector, so that reply is guaranteed to be significantly smaller than request, and by standard drop small requests. -- ++ytti
Current thread:
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status, (continued)
- 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 Steven Sommars (Mar 19)
- 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 29)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Harlan Stenn (Mar 28)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ragnar Sundblad (Mar 29)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Harlan Stenn (Mar 28)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ragnar Sundblad (Mar 29)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Harlan Stenn (Mar 28)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Harlan Stenn (Mar 28)
- Re: UDP/123 policers & status Ragnar Sundblad (Mar 29)