On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Glen Kent <glen.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Is it true that UDP is often subjected to stiffer rate limits than TCP? Is
I hear tell that some folk are engaging in this practice... You might have seen this hear little ditty: <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-byrne-opsec-udp-advisory-00> you may have also put your ear to the tracks and seen a bunch of kids using these 'you-dee-pee en-tee-pee' packets to fill up the tubes across the lands... Sometimes they use not just 'en-tee-pee', but also that old hoary bastard 'dee-en-ess' for their no good traffic backup propositions. > there a reason why this is often done so? Is this because UDP is stateless > and any script kiddie could launch a DOS attack with a UDP stream? I understand, and I'm new hear so bear with me, that there are you-dee-pee services out there in the hinterlands which will say a whole lot more to you than you said to them... like your worst nightmare when it comes to smalltalk. > Given the state of affairs these days how difficult is it going to be for > somebody to launch a DOS attack with some other protocol? > not very hard at all... but here's your lipstick and there's the pig... :)
