Clueless service restrictions (was RE: Anti-spam System Idea)

John Kristoff jtk at northwestern.edu
Tue Feb 17 22:59:58 UTC 2004


On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 21:48:18 +0000
Alex Bligh <alex at alex.org.uk> wrote:

> a) Some forms of filtering, which do occasionally prevent the customer
>    from using their target application, are in general good, as the
>    operational (see, on topic) impact of *not* applying tends to be
>    worse than the disruption of applying them. Examples: source IP
>    filtering on ingress, BGP route filtering. Both of these are known
>    to break harmless applications. I would suggest both are good things.

There are some potential applications that these can break also.  For
example, a distributed application that sends out probes might wish to
use the source IP address of a remote collector that is used to measure
time delay or network path information.  If Lumeta could have tunnels
to a bunch of hosts, send traceroutes to various Internet places through
those tunnels and have the tunneled hosts use Lumeta's IP as the source
IP, they could build a pretty cool distributed peacock map.

It is of course difficult to find a way to use these legitimate types of
apps today without the infrastructure succumbing to attacks such as the
source spoofed DoS traffic floods.

John



More information about the NANOG mailing list