-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/10/2013 06:00 PM, Michael Mol wrote: >> >> It's been ages since I looked at that link and longer addresses >> would certainly be needed anyway but certainly with DNSSEC again >> concocted by costly unthoughtful and unengaging groups who chose >> to ignore DJB and enable amplification attacks. > > What from DJB did they ignore? I honestly don't know what you're > talking about. >
This was a non-sequitur as far as I can tell, but I remember the amplification attack from a talk: http://vimeo.com/18279777 (video) http://cr.yp.to/talks/2010.12.28/slides.pdf (slides) It was a really good talk, however you feel about DJB. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRPTnkAAoJEBxJck0inpOia6EP/1Bu1rhx5cCi6/bl/J3MeJm3 CAaGXQG6iSnxxIXVqVXTs2fioZH2f3Xsq3jvKBoAQfil2ocGQa4LAPSGbLYX99xr XodEfm530EDK02UsqnyGHX2pzFQzUR/cQ0/SFpd8tMtEiYRdASIT6VtqoJoQWsoA unvPvK6xxHhH/YwmB+miPUSVl1nvmqT6Z7OKmpQL+MRHCQFvyk7SeClVf8OmAPkn NX/m3pSbsHdAtj6QP6CU8nAF1QbgWehhvZkx8UxqwPz8n8AO1JfY+zG669B5F6u+ MRcnN1s6jgIVoAgeqvgDjUC8JnkQTGBg3Lkdrv9IcM7N/+4ILvlH6h3IeSiI6unU hnganpVCl0q03N+qRi3JsHfdR/ZNBEetkplOai/QKyUltKohGG4LLPbqBFEdg+NP nVWz/Y4wn3h2uasClfIbehxSQDKlbHCvKOLp/dEmcFsra29vAF3pu15V1okmqdwF qzwf1k7nxoyjCT4YVnQv7F9OwnyYwm3nEmOjQyShJZN3gN82/4b+1R0LyhjeOled WcF8dnuxNpITjr1OusQ9MUeYmotWX2dj+//6zsrwZVs3QTNyOHx5VVe9Bl3DdcKr lFthQKyjsQAGgMD7zFoy4JxPReBwTQhu/QGcGKVKLIVRlTJ0XRQWVHUijlVY6dqB lIZu+xpwtY8OeZ20e+BC =knjT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
