Ok So I had issues with ginernet and their protection, specifically the fact that they said all the customization they could do is enable/disable layers so I took Qraktyzl's advice and switched to blazingfast.io.
23-2-2015:
-Did the transfer and my sinusbot can't connect (Socket closed for sinusbot instances) due to protection, Ticket submitted to Blazingfast support.
-Support response time was less than 15 minutes,knew the issue when i described it, music bots connecting perfectly now, website and teamspeak are all functional he even knew that I hadnt whitelisted the IP, for the ddos protection I'm still gonna have to wait on a friend to help me test it. Support Rating 10/10.
After testing the server with the help of Qraktyzl we tried the following:
1st:
Attack Power:around 15 gbps
Method:XTS3
Result: No changes, packet loss still 0~1% (most probably user's connection)
2nd:
Attack power:20 gbps
MethodNS
Result: No changes, packet loss still 0~1% (most probably user's connection)
3rd:
Attack power:20 gbps
Method:TCP-ACK
Result: Packet loss rose to around 4~5% (normally efficient because attack normally leaks) but the server crashed shortly after, this could be due to a bug with latest teamspeak or due to a null route which i dont know if it crashes.
Overall I believe the protection is solid but Qraktyzl may disagree whether or not 4% packetloss under attack is high or not.
23-2-2015:
-Did the transfer and my sinusbot can't connect (Socket closed for sinusbot instances) due to protection, Ticket submitted to Blazingfast support.
-Support response time was less than 15 minutes,knew the issue when i described it, music bots connecting perfectly now, website and teamspeak are all functional he even knew that I hadnt whitelisted the IP, for the ddos protection I'm still gonna have to wait on a friend to help me test it. Support Rating 10/10.
After testing the server with the help of Qraktyzl we tried the following:
1st:
Attack Power:around 15 gbps
Method:XTS3
Result: No changes, packet loss still 0~1% (most probably user's connection)
2nd:
Attack power:20 gbps
MethodNS
Result: No changes, packet loss still 0~1% (most probably user's connection)
3rd:
Attack power:20 gbps
Method:TCP-ACK
Result: Packet loss rose to around 4~5% (normally efficient because attack normally leaks) but the server crashed shortly after, this could be due to a bug with latest teamspeak or due to a null route which i dont know if it crashes.
Overall I believe the protection is solid but Qraktyzl may disagree whether or not 4% packetloss under attack is high or not.
Last edited: