nanog mailing list archives

Re: False information: CEO of Versign facts are wrong


From: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman () es net>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 10:16:53 -0700


Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 09:47:35 -0700
From: Mark Boolootian <booloo () ucsc edu>
Sender: owner-nanog () merit edu


It might be a matter of interpretation.  According to
http://d.root-servers.org/october21.txt:

   2.1. Some root name servers were unreachable from many parts of the
   global Internet due to congestion from the attack traffic delivered
   upstream/nearby.  While all servers continued to answer all queries they
   received (due to successful overprovisioning of host resources), many
   valid queries were unable to reach some root name servers due to attack-
   related congestion effects, and thus went unanswered.

While I'm not trying to act as Sclavos' apologist, I think you have to
be careful about how you respond to this particular claim of his.  You 
can't dismiss it out-of-hand.  Misleading?  Yes.  Flat out false?  You'd
have to be more convincing.


Sorry, Mark, but we can. 

The congestion did not take down 9 of 13 servers, which was Scalvos
claim. It did severely impact ALL Internet traffic and traffic to/from
DNS servers was a part of it. 

He did not say that some people could not resolve names. In fact, he
says that they could. He is quoted as saying: "It should scare people
that nine of the 13 went down."  No equivocation in that statement.
No accuracy, either.
-- 
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: oberman () es net                       Phone: +1 510 486-8634


Current thread: