FUD: 15% of world's internet traffic hijacked

Jeremy L. Gaddis jeremy at evilrouters.net
Fri Dec 3 02:12:57 UTC 2010


Hanlon's razor?
 On Dec 1, 2010 6:43 PM, "Brett Watson" <brett at the-watsons.org> wrote:
>
> On Dec 1, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
>> sometimes I love to pull your chain... :) I agree though that folks
>> won't publish this data (in general) directly, for whatever reason.
>> Also, right '15% of traffic' really should have been '15% of routes*'
>
> Agreed, I should have been more clear. I wasn't implying that much traffic
either, but rather "15% of global prefixes."
>
> I was more focused on, "Seems clear enough that traffic *transited* China
ASNs, as opposed to being blackholed as we seen in many hijacks.
>
> Further, in hopes of generating discussion... I've seen a lot of comments
along the lines of "this was likely an accident, misconfiguration, or
fat-finger..."
>
> I'm having a really hard time figuring how, if traffic not only diverted
to China but *transited* China, this could be any kind of mistake. I'm not
able to get my fingers or thumbs to randomly (seemingly) select
approximately 15% of all prefixes, originate those, modify filters so I can
do so, and also somehow divert it to another router that doesn't have the
hijacked prefixes I'm announcing but rather forwards the source traffic on
to it's intended destination.
>
> I can't seem to work all of that out into any kind of "accident."
>
> Anyone?
>
> -b



More information about the NANOG mailing list