nanog mailing list archives
Re: ddos attacks
From: Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:40:05 +0000
On 19/12/2013 13:17, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
This is a base requirement for any network operator, without exception.
in fact, this comes down to cost / benefit / application analysis, without exception. Many hosting profiles don't require this sort of anti-DDoS kit. In many cases it's far cheaper to permanently disconnect a customer who is the subject of continual DoS's rather than fork out loadsamoney for boxes like this. For applications at the higher end of the spectrum, there are many situations where it's more cost effective / resilient / sensible to farm out online content to CDNs, whose infrastructure will be much better equipped to handle several tens of gigs of DDoS traffic than even a reasonably large deployment of local anti-ddos boxes. I'm sure mitigation boxes like this serve well in many situations if the cost / benefit justifies the expenditure, but as with most things, it's a case of applying the best tool for the job rather than blind application of shiny toys. Nick
Current thread:
- Re: ddos attacks, (continued)
- Re: ddos attacks Peter Phaal (Dec 18)
- Re: ddos attacks cb.list6 (Dec 18)
- Re: ddos attacks Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 18)
- Re: ddos attacks Jon Lewis (Dec 18)
- RE: ddos attacks James Braunegg (Dec 18)
- Re: ddos attacks Tore Anderson (Dec 19)
- Re: ddos attacks Eugeniu Patrascu (Dec 19)
- Re: ddos attacks Adrian M (Dec 19)
- Re: ddos attacks Paul Ferguson (Dec 19)
- Re: ddos attacks Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 18)
- Re: ddos attacks Dobbins, Roland (Dec 19)
- Re: ddos attacks Nick Hilliard (Dec 19)
- Re: ddos attacks Dobbins, Roland (Dec 19)
- Re: ddos attacks Nick Hilliard (Dec 19)
- Re: ddos attacks Dobbins, Roland (Dec 19)
- Re: ddos attacks Tore Anderson (Dec 19)
- Re: ddos attacks Lee Howard (Dec 19)
- Re: ddos attacks Jon Lewis (Dec 19)
- Re: ddos attacks cb.list6 (Dec 19)