Sean Donelan wrote:
What is the difference between a transit provider and an access provider,
specially in the consumer space? Why is a transit provider expected to
deliver the bits, but the access provider isn't? Since the bulk of
Internet access is actually provided by wholesale providers
Sean Donelan wrote:
ISPs don't have (much) control over third-party computers. But they can
control their network capacity. Of course, its not a complete solution.
If you are a mid-level ISP, you may have a choke point to your customer
but are vulnerable from your upstream provider. A better
On Sat, 29 Nov 2003, Petri Helenius wrote:
If you are an access provider, specially in the consumer space, you can
do many things to help the Greater Internet by keeping your own back
yard in good shape. In the transit business, you are expected to
deliver the bits regardless of the content
At 06:24 PM 11/28/2003, Sean Donelan wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2003, Petri Helenius wrote:
If you are an access provider, specially in the consumer space, you can
do many things to help the Greater Internet by keeping your own back
yard in good shape. In the transit business, you are expected to
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003, Daniel Senie wrote:
At 06:24 PM 11/28/2003, Sean Donelan wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2003, Petri Helenius wrote:
If you are an access provider, specially in the consumer space, you can
do many things to help the Greater Internet by keeping your own back
yard in good
Hi, Stuart.
] So you believe that the edges of the net are smaller, bandwidth-wise,
] than the core?
This was certainly the case in my previous life at a large hosting
provider. We had GigE LANs, used providers with OC192 backbones,
but had only OC3 to OC12 links to our providers. Like most
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003, Rob Thomas wrote:
Our choke points were always our peering or transit links. This
was the case for our (large) enterprise customers as well.
Some people refer to it as the hourglass effect, but it has more than one
bump. Generally only the smallest bottleneck controls
Hi, Sean.
] lower bandwidthhigher bandwidth
Great ASCII chart. :)
] Of course, there are some exceptions like a customer with an OC192 uplink
] or an ISP running a web hosting center on a ISDN link.
Another bit to consider is address space. Code Red discovered
a lot of folks with
[Sorry for responding to old mail, but I'm catching up]
On Sunday, November 16, 2003, at 02:12 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
I've often tried to explain that ISPs generally view worms as a
capacity
planning issue. Worms change the eco-system of the Internet and
ISPs
have to adapt. But ISPs
Stuart Staniford writes:
It would seem for the Internet to reliably resist bandwidth attacks
from future worms, it has to be, roughly bigger in the middle than at
the edges. If this is the case, then the worm can choke edges at the
sites it infects, but the rest of the net can still function.
On Monday, November 24, 2003, at 04:59 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, essentially, you are saying that the edges (customers, presumably)
need to be bandwidth-limited to protect the core?
I wasn't advocating a solution, just observing the way things would
have to be for worms to be purely a
Stuart Staniford writes:
I wasn't advocating a solution, just observing the way things would
have to be for worms to be purely a buy a bigger box problem (as I
think Sean was suggesting if I didn't misunderstand him).
Ah.
It would generally seem that ISPs would provide more downstream
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003, Stuart Staniford wrote:
So it would seem that worms are, at a minimum, not a simple or
unproblematic capacity management problem.
Things are rarely as simple as they appear. Even buying a military
grade black box may not solve the worm problem.
There are some natural
On Monday, November 24, 2003, at 08:00 PM, Sean Donelan wrote:
There are some natural choke points in the Internet between ISPs and
customers. The customer may have a 1000 Mbps GigE LAN and the ISP may
have an OC192 backbone, but the link between them is normally much
smaller. Slammer,
No explaination why Sante Fe officials had not patched the city's
computers in the three months since Microsoft announced the vulnerability
and released the software updates. Nor why Sante Fe didn't have up to
date anti-virus programs running on its computers.
Nor why they were using such
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 06:26:50 EST, Alex Yuriev said:
Because for people outside our little industry the software is a tool to get
a JOB done, not the job itself.
It doesn't take long for the average mechanic to learn that buying cheap
wrenches is a bad idea.
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon, 2003-11-17 10:23
To: Alex Yuriev
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Santa Fe city government computers knocked out by worm
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 06:26:50 EST, Alex
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sean
Donelan writes:
The US is still losing relatively major city government computer networks
due to the Nachi/Welchia worm.
Sante Fe city government's entire computer network was knocked offline
on Friday by the Nachi worm. City employees could not access
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 06:26:50 EST, Alex Yuriev said:
Because for people outside our little industry the software is a tool to get
a JOB done, not the job itself.
It doesn't take long for the average mechanic to learn that buying cheap
wrenches is a bad idea.
Do you take your car to
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 06:26:50 -0500 (EST), you wrote:
No explaination why Sante Fe officials had not patched the city's
computers in the three months since Microsoft announced the vulnerability
and released the software updates. Nor why Sante Fe didn't have up to
date anti-virus programs
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:25:08 GMT, Jeffrey Paul said:
Which is probably why they end up buying the expensive, supported one
(like everyone else). It's also why they get worms.
I said cheap, not inexpensive. There's a difference. :)
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Original Message -
From: Jeffrey Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Alex Yuriev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 7:25 AM
Subject: RE: Santa Fe city government computers knocked out by worm
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
On 17 Nov 2003, at 11:17, todd glassey wrote:
H - I would have used a different picture - I would have said that
the
average Ferrari Owner to realizes that if they don't tune their horse,
it
dies on them... while they are driving it., So why don't the
operators of
Microsoft OS
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 06:26:50 EST, Alex Yuriev said:
Because for people outside our little industry the software is a tool to
get a JOB done, not the job itself.
Valdis Kletnieks responded:
It doesn't take long for the average mechanic to learn that buying cheap
wrenches is a bad
Valdis Kletnieks responded:
It doesn't take long for the average mechanic to learn that buying cheap
wrenches is a bad idea.
to which Alex replied:
Do you take your car to McLaren service center? Why not? They definitely
have better tools.
To which I say:
No, but if the mechanic
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 09:40:01AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Valdis Kletnieks responded:
It doesn't take long for the average mechanic to learn that buying cheap
wrenches is a bad idea.
to which Alex replied:
Do you take your car to McLaren service center? Why not? They
The US is still losing relatively major city government computer networks
due to the Nachi/Welchia worm.
Sante Fe city government's entire computer network was knocked offline
on Friday by the Nachi worm. City employees could not access e-mail or
work with their computers all day Friday, and
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 06:22:08 -0500 (EST), Sean Donelan wrote:
http://kobtv.com/index.cfm?viewer=storyviewerid=6232cat=HOME
No explaination why Sante Fe officials had not patched the city's
computers in the three months since Microsoft announced the vulnerability
and released the software
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003, Jamie Reid wrote:
There was a comment (maybe even mine) in a previous thread
about accepting a base level of potentially compromised hosts
on a network, as the costs of rooting out every last one becomes
unwieldly. Networks are large enough that security must be
viewed
29 matches
Mail list logo
