August 2018 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Confirming source-routed multicast is dead on the public Internet
by John Kristoff 01 Aug '18

01 Aug '18

On Wed, 1 Aug 2018 15:45:44 +0000 Adam Davenport <adam(a)davenpro.com> wrote: > I can confirm that GTT does indeed filter IP sourced from 224.0.0.0/4 at its edge. Do you mean sent to 224/4 or literally anything with a source address of 224/4? For those that are or are considering filtering, you might also want to consider limiting IGMP at router interfaces. The only known use of IGMP past the local link I'm aware of was for mtrace tool, but allowing it can pose some danger in two forms. One is yet another DDoS reflection and amplification vector, another is a some router system and configuration disclosure. See the following for details: <https://ccronline.sigcomm.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/p27-sargent.pdf> In experiments I ran in early parts of that work I found that Cogent did not forward IGMP messages through its network in my tests, but this may be due to the routing hardware/software they were using at the time rather than an explicit filtering policy. John

1 0

unwise filtering policy on abuse mailboxes
by Dan Hollis 01 Aug '18

01 Aug '18

can we please just stop this nonsense? ip under your direct control originates sewage. you should accept reports as-is. requiring victims of your sewage to go through special contortions to report it to you is not acceptable. > ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- > <abuse(a)psychz.net> > (reason: 550 "The mail server detected your message as spam and has prevented delivery.")

12 15

Windstream Contact
by Michael H Lambert 01 Aug '18

01 Aug '18

Could someone from Windstream please contact me off-list? We have a peering issue. Thanks, Michael ----- Michael H Lambert, GigaPoP Manager Phone: +1 412 268-4960 Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center/3ROX FAX: +1 412 268-5832 300 S Craig St, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA lambert(a)psc.edu

1 0

Re: Confirming source-routed multicast is dead on the public Internet
by John Kristoff 01 Aug '18

01 Aug '18

On Wed, 1 Aug 2018 02:43:10 +0000 "Mankamana Mishra (mankamis) via NANOG" <nanog(a)nanog.org> wrote: > other than billing problem, is there any other reasons why multicast > would not be viable for public internet ? Two other significant contributing factors stem from complexity and security issues. Here are some references I'm familiar with: <https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog21/presentations/eubanks.ppt> <https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog35/presentations/kristoff.pdf> <https://www.cymru.com/jtk/tmp/secure-junos-mcast.html> The last link was briefly maintained on Team Cymru's production template section, but it looks it is now gone and like this is the last copy of it I had before it was published a few years ago. John

1 0