Re: Peering versus Transit

[Alexis Rosen <alexis () panix com>]

Vadim Antonov writes:
> Sanjay Dani(maillists) <indus () professionals com> wrote:
>
> > Heh.  That's an example of how stupid technology is being
> > preserved by stupid legistlation.  The laws regarding POTS are
> > generally legal fixes for techincal problems (like inability
> > to block annoying calls).
>
> > Forgotten the syn flood attack so quickly? Heard of IP spoofing?
>
> How long did it take for OS vendors to come up with fixes?
> A week.
>
> And for how long telcos can't do anything about annoying calls?
> A hundred years.
>
> That only confirms my point.

I agree with Vadim 100% on his larger point (the hydra-like peering vs.
transit argument).

That said, I think that this particular response is wrong. The fact that
Avi and I hacked out a half-assed solution in a few days, or that OS vendors
are working on a four-fifths-assed solution now (most don't have one ready,
as far as I know), doesn't really solve the problem. Most people here can
probably name a half-dozen ways off the top of their head to use forged-
source-IP packets to do incredible damage to large numbers of hosts or to
most/all of the net. I know I can, and I'm far from the biggest expert
here.

Source IP forging is a Sword of Damocles that hangs over the net. It will
destroy us, sooner or later, if we don't do something about it.

/a
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -