| To: | Jamal Hadi <hadi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | RE: Route cache performance under stress |
| From: | Ralph Doncaster <ralph@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:29:18 -0400 (EDT) |
| Cc: | Pekka Savola <pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx>, CIT/Paul <xerox@xxxxxxxxxx>, "'Simon Kirby'" <sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'David S. Miller'" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, "fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx" <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20030610075702.I37165@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306101432530.21247-100000@xxxxxxxxxx> <20030610075702.I37165@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | ralph+d@xxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Jamal Hadi wrote: > Assuming the attacker has a 100mbps link to you, yes ;-> A script kiddie 0wning a box with a FE connection is nothing. During what was probably the worst DOS I got hit with, one of my upstream providers said they were seeing about 600mbps of traffic related to the attack. -Ralph |
| Previous by Date: | RE: Route cache performance under stress, Ralph Doncaster |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [patch]: CONFIG_IPV6_SUBTREES fix for MIPv6, Masahide NAKAMURA |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: Route cache performance under stress, Jamal Hadi |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, Florian Weimer |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |