[OPSEC] draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory

Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> Tue, 21 July 2015 00:46 UTC

Return-Path: <cb.list6@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: opsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0587D1ACCF9 for <opsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 17:46:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vAuqPSk_b5lM for <opsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 17:46:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x234.google.com (mail-wi0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 764C01ACCF8 for <opsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 17:46:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wibxm9 with SMTP id xm9so105787772wib.0 for <opsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 17:46:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=c66ivcM13QERDlJa2YIYKWxHJDaAMZHhEpCvmwPNsnI=; b=0zwdlC9+hwdZa3mPWNbORyL+l8+5IVEuaxp7U/6PfHRBUwc199cGNCsTOKrEEuF+RU jO2/Q7ImzK5X/M2nrNmi5ihhecx1mlN3R1Cxm+cUkHSKkAcCugXrq9+SMNzmw7G7F2+j GzaVo0kt5/x4hR6NaaGMYPMf/t96LouaWcziT/a4fPiPSo3na/vMnXGttIONu/26VmAe glvq4KocdTPzhqRSeV+DfkbmyKzqyvRfcKwgqcISZxdW4FT5mp/orVgs18hgHsXIE7yB oVO3JiDOIDKirrrVet8dB7EhDcr/2o1QRqNwvjac9s1xrSRosQkzMMbZHMFvcHwQnand E6Zw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.235.227 with SMTP id up3mr66029968wjc.132.1437439604157; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 17:46:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.191.232 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Jul 2015 17:46:44 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 17:46:44 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGS3m7UtcXfFiv5tdFAAvVGm2cVSMzYxR88HEkXNwN0a6w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: "opsec@ietf.org" <opsec@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e0141a510fdf1e7051b57fc99"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsec/JUDNc_YbwR-xP9xYZf59m-3JrC4>
Cc: draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory@tools.ietf.org
Subject: [OPSEC] draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory
X-BeenThere: opsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: opsec wg mailing list <opsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsec>, <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsec/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec>, <mailto:opsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 00:46:47 -0000

Op sec,

Given the number of udp related developments, I created this I-d to express
concern  about further udp work and expound on some operational practices
that conflict with udp growth.

Your feedback is welcome.

=========

A new version of I-D, draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Cameron Byrne and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:        draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory
Revision:    00
Title:        Advisory Guidelines for UDP Deployment
Document date:    2015-07-20
Group:        Individual Submission
Pages:        5
URL:
https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory-00.txt
Status:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory/
Htmlized:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory-00


Abstract:
  User Datagram Protocol (UDP) is commonly used as a volumetric attack
  transport on the internet.  Some network operators experience surges
  of UDP attack traffic that are multiple orders of magnitude above the
  baseline traffic rate for UDP.  Application developers should be
  advised that UDP is being rate-limited on a bits-per-second and
  packet-per-second basis by network operators to enforce known good
  baseline traffic levels for UDP. UDP has been abused to such an
  extent that legitimate use may become collateral damage and
  application and protocol developers should avoid using UDP as a
  transport when possible.





Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat