nanog mailing list archives
Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG?
From: Rick Wesson <wessorh () ar com>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 16:47:04 -0700
I am saying I am reading the OARC comments and this is sort of what it fees like. As much as Gadi seems to appropriate others credit, Randy Vaugh and him have been doing this work for some time and deserves some credit so I'd say "have you spoken to them about how to make their report better" yet instead of "create more".
Yes, we have worked with Gati and Randy Vaugh; infact randy helped me out today; thanks randy!
There is a difference in how Randy/Gati collect data and how we collect data. The stuff we publish are from numerous dns based realtime blacklists and spam traps we run. Other folks black-hole botnets and capture data.
We both come up with a dataset that overlaps but we don't yet know by how much. So our data is another view using a different methodology and isn't supposed to be "better" but confirming of where the problem is and estimates of its magnitude.
-rick
Current thread:
- Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG?, (continued)
- Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG? Peter Dambier (May 26)
- Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG? Gadi Evron (May 26)
- Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG? Sean Donelan (May 26)
- Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG? Peter Dambier (May 26)
- Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG? Gadi Evron (May 26)
- Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG? Sean Donelan (May 30)
- Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG? Rick Wesson (May 26)
- Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG? Martin Hannigan (May 26)
- Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG? Rick Wesson (May 26)
- Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG? Gadi Evron (May 26)
- Re: Are botnets relevant to NANOG? Michael . Dillon (May 30)