Re: [c-nsp] Hardening LPTS

Saku Ytti <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.network.nsp.cisco
Message-ID <CAAeewD9yEr9ZNcGC=wQO3Gd1UOxVS003S7U+9DEWDMxf8mDSvQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 4 Jun 2021 at 17:19, Mark Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks for comments. This is very valuable info. What are your thoughts about:
> flow udp default rate 0
> flow tcp default rate 0
>
> Are they safe to use? Cisco did not recommend them but I dont understand why. And they failed to explain. Maybe because they dont understand themselves either

As LPTS is never going to be particularly safe for attackers but
mostly will work for accidental congestion I would personally not
change anything, until you have realised risk, at least then I will
have some confidence that the change improves availability.

-- 
  ++ytti
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.