Ingress filtering on transits, peers, and IX ports
Casey Deccio
casey at deccio.net
Mon Oct 19 22:45:25 UTC 2020
> On Oct 14, 2020, at 3:34 PM, Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuhnke at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think he means packet captures from an example, voluntarily-tested recursive nameserver subject to this attack.
Thanks. We have updated all the report pages with a self-test tool specific to the network associated with the report. This should allow a network admin that received our report to check whether or not the condition still exists and to perform a packet capture from whatever vantage point they want in their network.
A more general tool (i.e., for anyone to use) will be made available in the future.
Cheers,
Casey
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 11:53 AM Casey Deccio <casey at deccio.net <mailto:casey at deccio.net>> wrote:
> Hi Bryan,
>
> > On Oct 14, 2020, at 12:43 PM, Bryan Holloway <bryan at shout.net <mailto:bryan at shout.net>> wrote:
> >
> > I too would like to know more about their methodology
>
> We've written up our methodology and results in a paper that will be available in a few weeks. Happy to post it here if folks are interested. Obviously, no networks are individually identified; it's all aggregate.
>
> Also, we're working on a self-test tool, but it's not quite ready yet. Sorry.
>
> > and actual tangibles ideally in the form of PCAPs.
>
> What do you mean by "tangibles in the form of PCAPs"?
>
> Casey
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20201019/24c38ae8/attachment.html>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list