The issue is that cloudfare in a way is generating their own market. If the ddos sites weren't protected by cloudfare they would eat each other alive. It's in their interest that their sites stay up so there is a need for their service. When GoDaddy hosts a bad site they aren't causing customer to sign up for the exact service for the protection they need from the bad site.
Regards, Dovid -----Original Message----- From: TR Shaw <ts...@oitc.com> Sender: "NANOG" <nanog-boun...@nanog.org>Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2016 19:45:14 To: Donn Lasher<d.las...@f5.com> Cc: nanog@nanog.org<nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Cloudflare, dirty networks and politricks > On Jul 28, 2016, at 7:30 PM, Donn Lasher via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote: > > On 7/28/16, 10:17 AM, "NANOG on behalf of J. Oquendo" > <nanog-boun...@nanog.org on behalf of joque...@e-fensive.net> wrote: > > >> While many are chanting: #NetworkLivesMatter, I have yet >> to see, read, or hear about any network provider being >> the first to set precedence by either de-peering, or >> blocking traffic from Cloudflare. There is a lot of >> keyboard posturing: "I am mad and I am not going to take >> it anymore" hooplah but no one is lifting a finger to >> do anything other than regurgitate "I am mad... This is >> criminal." > > (long discussion, was waiting for a place to jump in..) > > If we want to be accurate about it, Cloudflare doesn’t host the DDoS, they > protect the website of seller of the product. We shouldn’t be de-peering > Cloud Flare over sites they protect any more than we would de-peer GoDaddy > over sites they host, some of which, no doubt, sell gray/black market/illegal > items/services. > > If, on the other hand, you can find a specific network actually generating > the volumes of DDoS, you should have a conversation about de-peering…. > > $0.02… > It would be nice however if Cloudflare would announce there “freebie” ciders and the IP block that host their paying customers. Most of the abuse centers on the free clients.
