RE: DoS attack ?

Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com> Sat, 08 December 2001 08:47 UTC

Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2001 09:33:40 +0100
From: Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>
Subject: RE: DoS attack ?
In-reply-to: <208750488.1007726743@localhost>
To: John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com>, Nicolas Popp <nico@realnames.com>, YangWoo Ko <newcat@spsoft.co.kr>
Cc: ietf-irnss@lists.elistx.com
Message-id: <27284955.1007804020@localhost>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-disposition: inline
References: <23656972.1007710432@localhost> <208750488.1007726743@localhost>

--On 01-12-07 12.05 -0500 John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com> wrote:

> I would only add, to both your comments and mine,
> that keeping state in a distributed system -- one in which a
> "first" query could reach one server and a subsequent one could
> reach a second one-- is terribly complex technically.

And, as I said, if you reissue the query every time as Nicholas suggests,
the result set can change between the two queries, and what do you do at
that time?

Maybe not so important for search engines, but, when talking about
keywords...

First you get item 1-20, then before you fetch 21-40, item 3 was removed so
you do get 22-41, which means that you never got item 21.

I don't want to explain those events to WIPO people....

  paf

RE: DoS attack ? Patrik Fältström
Re: DoS attack ? YangWoo Ko
RE: DoS attack ? Nicolas Popp
RE: DoS attack ? Nicolas Popp
RE: DoS attack ? John C Klensin
RE: DoS attack ? Patrik Fältström
RE: DoS attack ? John C Klensin
RE: DoS attack ? Nicolas Popp
Re: DoS attack ? John C Klensin
Re: DoS attack ? John C Klensin
Re: DoS attack ? Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine
DoS attack ? YangWoo Ko