Re: Google to offer fiber to end users

[Joel Jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>]

James Hess wrote:
> For now.. with 1gigabit residential connections,  BCP 38  OUGHT to be
> Google's answer.  If Google handles that properly,  they  _should_
> make it mandatory that all traffic  from residential customers be
> filtered, in all cases,   in order to  only forward   packets with
> their  legitimately assigned  or registry-issued publicly verifiable
> IP prefix(es)  in the  IP source field.     Must be mandatory even for
>  'resellers',  otherwise there's no point.

The  amount of DOS that is spoofed today is by all reports significantly
lower as percentage of overall DOS than it was in say 2000.

BCP 38 is all fine and dandy, and you should implement it, but it's not
going to stop the botnets.


> And Google should provide _reasonable_ response to investigate  manual
> abuse reports to well-publicized points of contact which go directly
> to a well-staffed dedicated abuse team, with authority and a clear and
> expeditious resolution process,  as a bare minimum,  and in addition
> to  any and all automatic measures.
>
>
> P.S.  reasonable abuse response is not defined as a  4-day delayed
> answer to a  'help, no contact addresses will answer me' post on nanog
> (long after automated processes finally kicked in)..     Reasonable
> response to a  continuous  1gigabit  flood  or  100 kilopacket  flood
> should be  less than 12 hours.
>
> If  they think things through carefully   (rather than copy+paste
> Google groups e-mail abuse management),    it'll  probably be alright
>
> --
> -J