Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: GLBX ICMP rate limiting (was RE: Tier-1 without their own backbone?)
From: Alex Rubenstein <alex () nac net>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 09:26:06 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)



NAC is not a global intercontinental super-duper backbone, but we do the
same.

It takes some education to the customers, but after they understand why,
most are receptive.

Especially when they get DOS'ed.




On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 variable () ednet co uk wrote:


On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, jlewis () lewis org wrote:

We have a similarly sized connection to MFN/AboveNet, which I won't
recommend at this time due to some very questionable null routing they're
doing (propogating routes to destinations, then bitbucketing traffic sent
to them) which is causing complaints from some of our customers and
forcing us to make routing adjustments as the customers notice
MFN/AboveNet has broken our connectivity to these destinations.

We've noticed that one of our upstreams (Global Crossing) has introduced
ICMP rate limiting 4/5 days ago.  This means that any traceroutes/pings
through them look awful (up to 60% apparent packet loss).  After
contacting their NOC, they said that the directive to install the ICMP
rate limiting was from the Homeland Security folks and that they would not
remove them or change the rate at which they limit in the foreseeable
future.

What are other transit providers doing about this or is it just GLBX?

Cheers,

Rich





  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]