Re: [tcpm] DoS attack from misbehaving receivers

Rob Sherwood <capveg@cs.umd.edu> Thu, 11 January 2007 22:30 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H58Qu-0002dY-1V; Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:30:04 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H58Qt-0002dJ-6J for tcpm@ietf.org; Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:30:03 -0500
Received: from circular.cs.umd.edu ([128.8.128.176]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H58Qs-0000Bl-04 for tcpm@ietf.org; Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:30:03 -0500
Received: from loompa.cs.umd.edu (loompa.cs.umd.edu [128.8.128.63]) by circular.cs.umd.edu (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.5) with ESMTP id l0BMU19Y027243; Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:30:01 -0500
Received: (from capveg@localhost) by loompa.cs.umd.edu (8.12.10/8.12.5) id l0BMU1YY026042; Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:30:01 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:30:01 -0500
From: Rob Sherwood <capveg@cs.umd.edu>
To: John Heffner <jheffner@psc.edu>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] DoS attack from misbehaving receivers
Message-ID: <20070111223001.GO2944@loompa.cs.umd.edu>
References: <20070111202843.GL2944@loompa.cs.umd.edu> <54AD0F12E08D1541B826BE97C98F99F1EE6E4E@NT-SJCA-0751.brcm.ad.broadcom.com> <20070111212732.GM2944@loompa.cs.umd.edu> <45A6B6FC.7020000@psc.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <45A6B6FC.7020000@psc.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org, david.malone@nuim.ie
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org

On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 05:15:24PM -0500, John Heffner wrote:
> The links with heavily aggregated traffic from local or regional ISPs up 
> to the tier 1 ISPs are almost always bandwidth capped, and are almost 
> always purchased in such that they are able to carry "just enough" 
> traffic -- that is, it's pegged for at least some of the time.  (Who 
> wants to pay for more than they use?)  The core of the Internet today is 
> provisioned to handle the load.  It seems to me the threat of 
> Internet-wide congestion collapse is a bit overstated these days.  (This 
> also applies to recent congestion control discussions.)

This is the part that is not clear to me: is it really the case that
back bone links have sufficient capacity to handle the sum of all
the access link capacity?  That is to say not the expected load, but
the maximum capacity?   I am familiar with many of the link capacity
estimation tools available, and it's my understanding that there is not
a conclusive answer here.

- Rob
.

_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm