well since someone responded.... this idea is a joke, to be uber blunt about it :)
On Thu, 28 Mar 2002, nighty wrote: > At 01:34 28/03/2002 -0800, BobsKC wrote: > >I am passing this on from lb aka Fireball .. he seems to want to help > > I doubt so, from my point of view but i dont know him, > added to that, i seriously doubt coder-com has anything to do with that, > at least .. its not ircu or X dependent. > > I just feel like this mailing list is not for passing kiddies messages, > i ignore him on purpose, its not to be filled by his messages relayed by opers. > > thrown like this .. I would say without reflexion .. what will prevent a > DDoSer to flood > hop number 24 (195.243.61.88) ?? or they would just hit uplink router, thus > taking down > ALOT MORE than "just" the irc server.... > > I'm maybe wrong but im not sure this could help *unless* the equivalent of > hop 21 is an OC48 > and you have IANA reserved blocks until the end. > > as a last remark, i think that the people running / hosting the undernet > servers are, in a good majority > ISP network admins since many years .. I dont know how old this fireball > is, but i doubt he's really mature, > or at least was last year or in the last months .. some of the people that > have been attacked had decades > of experience in Networking... I think that if that was really helpfull > (and easy to do for servers ... this > may also be highly network topology dependent or involve too much > costs/changes at ISP to be placed) > and effective it would have already been done. > > >Bob > > > >[1:29] <lb> anyway.. > >[1:29] <lb> 21 BN-ag1.BN.net.DTAG.DE (62.154.66.46) 179 ms 180 ms 181 ms > >[1:29] <lb> 22 192.168.0.2 (192.168.0.2) 188 ms 191 ms 184 ms > >[1:29] <lb> 23 192.168.0.2 (192.168.0.2) 189 ms 185 ms 183 ms > >[1:29] <lb> 24 195.243.61.88 (195.243.61.88) 193 ms 187 ms 185 ms > >[1:29] <lb> check this out a bit.. :) > > > ok > >[1:30] <lb> 192.168.0.2 > >[1:30] <lb> the microsoft lan default > >[1:30] <lb> :) > >[1:30] <lb> so the router's ip can't be seen.. > >[1:30] <lb> if they do that to undernet servers.. > >[1:30] <lb> it would be a lot harder to packet them.. > >[1:30] <lb> a WHOLE lot.. > -- ---------------| Daniel Dent | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | ---------------| char number_of_bugs; // *No-one* needs more than 256 bugs. Don't be silly.
