Re: [j-nsp] ddos protocol protection - IPv4-unclassified

2017-04-11 Thread Saku Ytti
Hey, >> b) LPTS only has 'aggregate' (NPU) level policing, ddos-protection has >> aggregate => ifd => ifl => sub > I don't really see a need for hierarchical policers and besides the uKernel > and RE policers are SW, only the LU has HW policer. It's not really hierarchical, same packet can't hit

Re: [j-nsp] ddos protocol protection - IPv4-unclassified

2017-04-11 Thread adamv0025
> Saku Ytti [mailto:s...@ytti.fi] > Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 11:37 PM > > Some problems with LPTS > > a) LPTS punted packets are not subject to MQC, so you cannot use interface > policers to limit say say ICMP, BGP etc Yeah this is a huge mess up, taking the control away and not providing sa

Re: [j-nsp] ddos protocol protection - IPv4-unclassified

2017-04-10 Thread Saku Ytti
On 11 April 2017 at 00:42, wrote: > Nope ASR9k is using LPTS to cya :) Some problems with LPTS a) LPTS punted packets are not subject to MQC, so you cannot use interface policers to limit say say ICMP, BGP etc b) LPTS only has 'aggregate' (NPU) level policing, ddos-protection has aggregate =>

Re: [j-nsp] ddos protocol protection - IPv4-unclassified

2017-04-10 Thread adamv0025
> Aaron Gould > Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 5:12 PM > > Junos ddos protect capabilities is new to me. I was pleasantly surprised to > learn about ddos protection in Junos and that it seems to be built-in to Junos > with Trio chip capabilities (like ACX5048 broadcomm-based doesn't seem to > suppo

Re: [j-nsp] ddos protocol protection - IPv4-unclassified

2017-04-10 Thread Aaron Gould
Junos ddos protect capabilities is new to me. I was pleasantly surprised to learn about ddos protection in Junos and that it seems to be built-in to Junos with Trio chip capabilities (like ACX5048 broadcomm-based doesn't seem to support ddos protect). In comparison to Cisco IOS-XR ASR9000, I'm pr

Re: [j-nsp] ddos protocol protection - IPv4-unclassified

2017-04-10 Thread Saku Ytti
On 10 April 2017 at 09:49, Mark Tees wrote: Hey, > Ytti will probably pop up and comment on this but we have As summoned. > flow-detection configured under global for ddos-protection which > create flows then actions when under DDOS like conditions rather than > hitting static policers. Only a

Re: [j-nsp] ddos protocol protection - IPv4-unclassified

2017-04-10 Thread adamv0025
> James Jun > Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 7:17 AM > > Hello Folks, > > We had a strange DoS attack against a customer attached to an MX104 router > that caused the device to completely stop forwarding all legitimate traffic > (routing protocols both igp and bgp timed out across all adjacencies a

Re: [j-nsp] ddos protocol protection - IPv4-unclassified

2017-04-10 Thread Cahit Eyügünlü
timeouts. You've effectively DoSed yourself with the >ARP requests I think. :) > >Kind regards, >Felix > > >From: juniper-nsp on behalf of Mark Tees > >Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 8:49 AM >To: Cahit Eyügünlü >Cc: j

Re: [j-nsp] ddos protocol protection - IPv4-unclassified

2017-04-09 Thread Mark Tees
From memory when I last tested this the default settings were pretty bad when under DOS conditions (IGP,BGP going down due to packets being dropped). Ytti will probably pop up and comment on this but we have flow-detection configured under global for ddos-protection which create flows then actions

Re: [j-nsp] ddos protocol protection - IPv4-unclassified

2017-04-09 Thread Cahit Eyügünlü
We are facing the exact Same thing with mx80 iPhone'umdan gönderildi James Jun şunları yazdı (10 Nis 2017 09:14): > Hello Folks, > > We had a strange DoS attack against a customer attached to an MX104 router > that caused the device to > completely stop forwarding all legitimate traffic (routi

[j-nsp] ddos protocol protection - IPv4-unclassified

2017-04-09 Thread James Jun
Hello Folks, We had a strange DoS attack against a customer attached to an MX104 router that caused the device to completely stop forwarding all legitimate traffic (routing protocols both igp and bgp timed out across all adjacencies and sessions). The attack traffic was roughly 5.9 Gbps and it