hi,
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 04:03:14PM +0100, Dominik Bay wrote:
Why are you blocking QUIC traffic anyway?
Because traditionally, UDP/80 was badness from stupid blackhats...
(We don't, but I can very well understand why UDP on traditional tcp ports
would get blocked, or strictly
On Jun 4, 2015, at 1:28 PM, Damian Menscher dam...@google.com wrote:
You don't need to block all UDP to filter DDoS traffic. Rate-limiting
traffic from the specific ports you mentioned (123, 53, 1900, 19, 161) is
sufficient. Given QUIC traffic always uses a high-numbered ephemeral port,
Folks:
We are the co-authors of an Internet-Draft of some design choices people need
to make when designing IPv6 and dual-stack networks
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices).
We are looking for information on the IGP combinations people are running in
their
On 06/04/2015 06:03 PM, Dominik Bay wrote:
On 06/04/2015 04:00 PM, Yannis Nikolopoulos wrote:
On 06/04/2015 01:08 PM, michalis.bersi...@hq.cyta.gr wrote:
From our side we have seen lots of IPv4 traffic from sources
originated from AS15169 (UDP port 443) .We are using netflow to
identify the
Hello,
From our side we have seen lots of IPv4 traffic from sources originated from
AS15169 (UDP port 443) .We are using netflow to identify the traffic.
Michalis
--
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2015 10:30:11 +0300
From:
