You can also use limited and kod.
I saw it being talked about here (I think) as a anti-flooding measure.

By the way, would someone know whether « restrict default limited kod
» (and notrap nomodify nopeer) is a bare minimum or is it « good » (as
in unlikely to ever be abused) ?

Also, having a pedagogical webpage on ntp.mydomain.tld strikes me a
very good idea.
Thanks for the tip ;-)

2012/8/10 Mouse <[email protected]>:
>>>> [...] we had two rather irate people call our emergency support
>>>> line, demanding that we fix the system that was attacking their
>>>> network.  On port 123/udp.  [...]
>>> [...]
>> Your NTP server could be responding to requests with forged source IP
>> addresses, so in a sense, your server really is "attacking" a
>> third-party.
>
> I never put the two together now, but this could be why I've never had
> any such complaints.  I have a watcher snooping my port-123 traffic and
> any IP that sends too fast gets router-blocked at my border.  I did
> this out of self-defense against clients that don't understand why it's
> a bad thing to query multiple times a second or the like.  But it does
> mean that I'm not much use as an attack bandwidth amplifier.  (Yes, I
> have similar guards on port 53 too....)
>
> /~\ The ASCII                             Mouse
> \ / Ribbon Campaign
>  X  Against HTML                [email protected]
> / \ Email!           7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
> _______________________________________________
> pool mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool
_______________________________________________
pool mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool

Reply via email to