Re: Inter-provider communications (Re: nobody @home)

["Matthew S. Hallacy" <poptix () POPTIX NET>]

Well, in light of all the gloom I would like to say that I had a good
experience with exodus/doubleclick, my network was recently the victim of
a smurf attack, one of the amps was doubleclick.net, I contacted exodus
about it and they (within an hour) put me into contact with
doubleclick.net who had someone call me, I was able to walk the person on
the phone through fixing the problem, and they are no longer a smurf amp.

It's nice to have a few good experiences..

FYI, I am not a customer of Exodus in any way.

                        Matthew S. Hallacy
                        XtraTyme Technologies
                        Systems/Network Administrator

On Sun, 21 Jan 2001, Dan Hollis wrote:

> Well, let's take a better example, smurf amps.
>
> I have some personal horror stories about running around in circles
> getting tier1s to turn off their smurf amps originating from their own
> routers or customers. Eg tier1 router was a smurf amp, it was smurfing, it
> could be easily verified to smurf, but they would not disable the smurf
> amp because it would have a "negative impact" on their customers. The
> fact it was being actively used as a smurf amp didnt seem to matter to them.
>
> This was in fact a case of "just flip a switch and turn off the attack".
>
> I'm sure others on this list have their share of horror stories as well.
>
> The hoops the public had to jump through the past couple years to get
> tier1s to turn off their smurf amps is mind boggling. And there are
> tier1s who are *still* actively running smurf amps in their cores.
>
> I'm actually suprised noone has filed lawsuits over this. Or maybe someone
> did and I missed it.
>
> -Dan