Are there any pointers? Thanks! --vadim
The only real solution is strong cryptographical authentication of the ownership of routing prefixes. For some reason i do not see any serious work in that direction being done.
Actually, it is being done. It's not ready for implementation yet. Tony
| Are there any pointers? There will be an ID as soon as it's cooked. Expect it this month (Jan). Tony | > The only real solution is strong cryptographical authentication of | > the ownership of routing prefixes. For some reason i do not see | > any serious work in that direction being done. | | Actually, it is being done. It's not ready for implementation yet.
Love to hear something about this at Nanog. Even if just a 5 minute thing, saying, hey operators, your going to need this, read it, comment on it, beat your favorite router vendor(s) to impentlement it. In message <199801010626.WAA21612@chimp.juniper.net>, Tony Li writes:
| Are there any pointers?
There will be an ID as soon as it's cooked. Expect it this month (Jan).
Tony
| > The only real solution is strong cryptographical authentication of | > the ownership of routing prefixes. For some reason i do not see | > any serious work in that direction being done. | | Actually, it is being done. It's not ready for implementation yet.
--- Jeremy Porter, Freeside Communications, Inc. jerry@fc.net PO BOX 80315 Austin, Tx 78708 | 1-800-968-8750 | 512-458-9810 http://www.fc.net
Just a couple of weeks ago, I was receiving multiple spams from a site that was being attacked with forged tcp connections to their mail server. This is the tcp sequence-number-guessing style of attack, and it was working quite well for the attackers. Is this new? -- Charles Howes -- chowes @ ics.bc.ca
participants (4)
-
Charles Howes -
Jeremy Porter -
Tony Li -
Vadim Antonov