nanog mailing list archives
Re: Code Red
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike () swm pp se>
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 08:43:09 +0200 (CEST)
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001 lucifer () lightbearer com wrote:
Reports from our monitoring systems saw the CPU usage jump by somewhere between 150-200% for our core routers today; our current theory is that
One of our downstreams with a /20 had not nullrouted their /20, so any nets not in use bounced back to us via their default route. This caused approx 4-8 megabit of traffic on their line due to all the scanning. After our customer put in a null route for their /20, the traffic problem ceased. The ping-pong routing was causing his 2600 to use a lot of cpu. I do expect most people to null route their nets, but if someone hasn't, this can cause problems due to scanning. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike () swm pp se
Current thread:
- Re: Code Red Jeff Ogden (Jul 19)
- Re: Code Red Patrick Greenwell (Jul 19)
- Re: Code Red Seth M. Kusiak (Jul 19)
- Re: Code Red Rob Thomas (Jul 19)
- Re: Code Red Seth M. Kusiak (Jul 19)
- Re: Code Red lucifer (Jul 19)
- Re: Code Red Bill Woodcock (Jul 19)
- Re: Code Red Dave Stewart (Jul 19)
- Re: Code Red lucifer (Jul 19)
- Re: Code Red Stephen J. Wilcox (Jul 19)
- Re: Code Red Mikael Abrahamsson (Jul 19)
- Re: Code Red John Kristoff (Jul 20)
- Re: Code Red Stephen J. Wilcox (Jul 20)
- Re: Code Red Larry Sheldon (Jul 20)
- Re: Code Red Stephen J. Wilcox (Jul 20)
- Re: Code Red Stephen J. Wilcox (Jul 20)
- Re: Code Red Patrick Greenwell (Jul 19)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Code Red Joe Blanchard (Jul 19)