Flooding Attacks By Exploiting Permanent Forwarding Loops

1. Coarse Prefixes extracted from routing tables at Route View Projects,

2. Try to avoid to traceroute the following IP blocks.

• IP blocks of governmental or military departments.
• Sensitive IP blocks we got complains. (not filtered during our experiment)

3. Finegrained prefixes used in our paper.

4. Trace set D_A for detecting forwarding loops.

5. Trace set D_B for identifying permanent forwarding loops.

6. Trace set D_C for exploring forwarding behaviors on multiple IP addresses in shadowed prefixes.

7. Trace set D_D1 , D_D2 , D_D3 , D_D4  for exploring forwarding behaviors from various viewpoints.

Routable Prefixes  (summary) (169357 prefixes)

Fine-grained Prefixes (summary) (5360480 prefixes)

Traced Prefixes (summary) (5238191 prefixes)

Candidate Prefixes (summary) (prefixes)

Among 10% of candidate prefixes, 

Shadowed Prefixes (summary) (10569 prefixes)  

Dark Prefixes (summary) (596 prefixes)

Persistent Forwarding Loops 

Imperiled Prefixes (summary) (10828 prefixes)

algorithm on identifying imperiled addresses:
    1: get the set of links in persistent forwarding loops
    2: examine traces for each address $d$ in data D_A.  If the trace to $d$ contains any link in persistent forwarding loops, and the following conditions are satisfied:
            a): trace ends a valid address. (that means no "*", "!" in the last hop)
            b): trace does not contain any forwarding loops
            c): trace ends the address $d$
            d): $d$ is not an infrastructure address in persistent forwarding loops
    3: Any fine-grained prefix that contains imperiled address is an imperiled prefix