rdobbins at arbor.net
Mon May 2 21:38:46 UTC 2016
On 2 May 2016, at 20:16, Martin Bacher wrote:
> However, Tier 1s and most probably also some of the Tier 2s may not
> want to offer it to customers because they are loosing money if less
> traffic is sent downstream on IP-Transit links.
I will go a step further than Danny's comments and state that this is
categorically and demonstrably untrue.
Many of the quite large 'Tier-1' and 'Tier-2' (using the old
terminology) operators on this list offer commercial DDoS mitigation
services making use of technologies like D/RTBH, S/RTBH, IDMS, et. al.
due to customer demand. They need these capabilities in order to defend
their own properties and assets, and they are also offering them to
end-customers who want and need them.
In point of fact, it's becoming difficult to find one which *doesn't*
offer this type of service.
There were a couple of situations in the first half of the first decade
of this millennium where operators took this attitude. But they changed
their tunes pretty rapidly once they themselves were impacted, and once
they started losing customers because they couldn't and wouldn't protect
And as Danny notes, these technologies are all tools in the toolbox.
NFV and 'SDN' have tremendous potential to make it a lot easier to bring
mitigation resources to bear in a dynamic and optimal fashion within
single spans of administrative control; and there are standards-based
efforts underway to provide for a higher degree of automation, increased
rapidity of response, and interoperability in both inter- and
intra-network DDoS mitigation scenarios.
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins at arbor.net>
More information about the NANOG