nanog mailing list archives
Re: Ping flooding
From: avg () ncube com (Vadim Antonov)
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 1996 17:12:43 +0800
Sorry, i was unclear. It should read "forwarding return packets back to the original source". In other words -- assume that forwards and backwards paths are both crossing the same interface. That assumption is practically always valid for tail circuits. --vadim
That's once again a matter of defaults -- routers should _by default_ discard all packets from interfaces which they won't use for forwarding those packets back.
Why? -- Jerry Anderson jerry () gi net Principal Engineer (402) 436-3030 Implementation & Consulting http://www.gi.net/jerry Global Internet Network Services (formerly known as MIDnet) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Ping flooding George Herbert (Jul 08)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Ping flooding Rob Gutierrez (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding Perry E. Metzger (Jul 10)
- Re: Ping flooding Vadim Antonov (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding Jerry Anderson (Jul 11)
- Re: Ping flooding Brett D. Watson (Jul 10)
- Re: Ping flooding Vadim Antonov (Jul 11)
- Re: Ping flooding Alan Hannan (Jul 11)
- Re: Ping flooding Per Gregers Bilse (Jul 11)
- Routing flaps, was Re: Ping flooding Forrest W. Christian (Jul 12)
- Re: Ping flooding Alan Hannan (Jul 11)
- Re: Ping flooding Bradley J. Passwaters (Jul 11)
- Re: Ping flooding Paul Ferguson (Jul 11)
- Re: Ping flooding Alan Hannan (Jul 11)
- Re: Ping flooding Jerry Anderson (Jul 12)