Gizmodo is calling out Cloudflare's claims that this affected anything more than Dutch networks: http://gizmodo.com/5992652
They point out, for example, that the IX's in question routinely see 2.0+Tbps peaks, so a 0.3Tbps attack would not be likely to shake a single IX, little like "the internet" itself.
Interesting rebuttal, although certainly not comprehensive.
Cloudflare is crying: "the sky is falling". Gizmodo is taking the other extreme: "nothing to see here; move along".
The truth is in the middle.
There were repercussions in Denver/Colorado with a Tier 1 network provider, mainly in the form of greatly increased latency. This impacted downstream providers, as well as a couple of my clients in Colorado. I informed those clients yesterday my opinion was the issue was either a network engineering/backhoe issue, or there was a major concerted cyber attack targeting the Denver area.
The reality? There was an attack. It was measurable. It did have a noticeable impact. But it was far more annoying and irritating than the headline "Internet killed. Film at 11." would lead one to believe.
While the IXs may routinely process 2.0+Tbps through their routing ASICs, they are unlikely to be prepared for receiving 0.3+Tbps to their router control planes. By saturating the control planes, you could destabilize routing protocols and cause link flaps, even if the underlying ASIC switching fabric is unharmed.
They are crafting the stories methodically (and successfully I'd say, given the number of times we all talk about CloudFlare on HN) to drive more exposure to their brand. It's too optimistic and hyperbolic sometimes, but no really different than any product announcement from Apple or Facebook.
In all fairness to them, a positive side effect is that we're all discussing now how to solve the root cause of this decades-old - but still threatening - problem (open networks and dns attacks). I guess it will really take an apocalyptic event to convince millions of operators to configure better their own networks.
This is not the first time CloudFlare uses hyperbolic headlines. Case in point: "Why Google Went Offline Today and a Bit about How the Internet Works"https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4747910
They point out, for example, that the IX's in question routinely see 2.0+Tbps peaks, so a 0.3Tbps attack would not be likely to shake a single IX, little like "the internet" itself.
Interesting rebuttal, although certainly not comprehensive.