nanog mailing list archives

Re: Network integrity and non-random removal of nodes


From: "Stephen Sprunk" <ssprunk () cisco com>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:29:27 -0600


Thus spake "William Waites" <ww () styx org>
I stand corrected.

It would be interesting to see what outdegree looks like as a function
of  rank --  in  the paper  they  give only  the  maximum and  average
(geo. mean) outdegrees. Is there also  a critical point 25% of the way
through  the ranking?  Probably not  or one  would expect  they'd have
mentioned it...

So then  the 12500  *biggest* routers have  to be disabled  before the
graph  breaks into  many islands.  This would  be yet  harder  from an
attacker's point of view, no?

Perhaps.  What would happen if every public exchange went offline at the
same time?  I think there's enough private connections in the DFZ to
maintain full connectivity, even if it might get a little slower.

Attacking carrier POPs would be a different matter.  You can take all of
UUnet down by hitting the same number of buildings, but the addresses aren't
so easily discovered, and that's still only one carrier in one country.

However, all of this is still a relatively minor risk compared to the damage
that can be caused by simple human error.

S


Current thread: