On 12/08/2010 11:08 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 8 dec 2010, at 20:10, Mohacsi Janos wrote:
>
>> Do you think adopting LISP or similar architectures to reduce the
>> problems mentioned above?
[...]
> Do you lose initial packets when there is no mapping state yet?
Yes. But there are p
The thread made it to both NetworkWorld:
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/120910-wikileaks-ddos-attacks.html
and Slashdot:
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/12/12/2120254/Has-Progress-Been-Made-In-Fighting-DDoS-Attacks
with the usual set of comments :)
-Lorand Jakab
On 12/12/2010 08:58 AM,
Since it is Friday, maybe some of peering experts have some time to
speculate what this new approach proposed by Comcast might be, as they
assert it would represent "a significant shift of Internet infrastructure."
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=202121
http://blog.comcast.com/2010
On 01/12/2011 02:59 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> On 21/03/2007 09:41, Tarig Ahmed wrote:
>> Is it true that NAT can provide more security?
>
> No.
>
> [snip]
>
> Your security guy will probably say that a private IP address will
> give better protection because it's not reachable on the internet.
>
On 01/26/2011 07:46 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> Do I just need to assign ip addresses to my servers, add records to
>> my DNS server and that's it? I'm running PowerDNS for DNS, Apache for
>> WWW. Postfix for SMTP.
>>
> It might be that simple, it might not. Depends on your application.
>
> For
On 01/28/2011 12:47 AM, Danny O'Brien wrote:
> If anyone can provide more details as to what they're seeing, the extent,
> plus times and dates, it would be very useful. In moments like this there
> are often many unconfirmed rumors: I'm seeking concrete reliable
> confirmation which I can pass ont
On 09/28/2010 10:15 PM, Erik L wrote:
> I realize that this is somewhat OT, but I'm sure that others on the list
> encounter the same issues and that at least some folks might have useful
> comments.
>
> An increasingly large number of our customers are using Gmail or Google Apps
> and almost
On 05/05/11 00:15, Jeff Young wrote:
> The most ambitious use of multicast I'm aware of is AT&T's UVerse
> network which multicasts (SS) from two
> head-ends all the way to the set top box in a home. But this is
> confined to the AT&T network and UVerse is
> arguably a "me-too" offering to compete
8 matches
Mail list logo