nanog mailing list archives
Re: Peering with abusers...good or bad?
From: Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2018 23:29:03 +0000
On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 2:13 PM Matthew Petach <mpetach () netflight com> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 4:13 PM, Dan Hollis <goemon () sasami anime net> wrote:OVH does not suprise me in the least. Maybe this is finally what it will take to get people to de-peer them.If I de-peer them, I pay my upstream to carry the attack traffic.
Your isp will do rtbh Your peers wont
If I maintain peering with them, the attack traffic is free. It would seem the economics work the other way around. It would be more cost effective for me to identify the largest sources of attacks, and reach out to directly peer with them, to avoid paying an upstream to carry the traffic, if I'm going to end up throwing it away anyhow.
Current thread:
- Peering with abusers...good or bad? Matthew Petach (Mar 02)
- Re: Peering with abusers...good or bad? Ca By (Mar 02)
- Re: Peering with abusers...good or bad? Bryan Holloway (Mar 02)
- Re: Peering with abusers...good or bad? Job Snijders (Mar 02)
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: Peering with abusers...good or bad? Baldur Norddahl (Mar 02)
- Re: Peering with abusers...good or bad? Job Snijders (Mar 02)
- Re: Peering with abusers...good or bad? Bryan Holloway (Mar 02)
- Re: Peering with abusers...good or bad? Ca By (Mar 02)
