← Back to blog

Protected IP Transit Against DDoS: Mitigation Designed to Preserve Legitimate Traffic

A practical guide to link saturation, 95th percentile billing risk, blackholing, asymmetric routing, adaptive filtering and the importance of both Gbps and Mpps.

Protected IP Transit Against DDoS: Mitigation Designed to Preserve Legitimate Traffic
Prevent saturation

An attack can fill the port long before the application has any chance to react.

Reduce billing risk

Malicious spikes can distort 95th percentile or traffic-based connectivity bills.

Preserve latency

Asymmetric routing allows ingress via Peeryx while keeping local egress when it makes sense.

Block without breaking

The goal is not only to filter fast, but to keep legitimate traffic working while the attack is stopped.

Today, many Internet-facing infrastructures — SaaS platforms, real-time services, hosting environments, gaming stacks or APIs — are regularly exposed to larger and more sophisticated DDoS attacks.

In a classic connectivity model, those attacks can quickly saturate links, interrupt service, inflate transit bills when billing is based on 95th percentile or raw traffic, or force blackholing of the attacked IP, directly impacting legitimate users.

That is exactly why protected IP transit anti-DDoS matters. Instead of allowing malicious traffic to reach the production edge and reacting too late, the traffic is brought through a mitigation layer designed to filter the attack before only clean traffic is delivered back.

The limits of the classic model under DDoS

Before looking at protected transit, it is important to understand why the classic model stops working once a service starts attracting serious or repeated attacks.

In a standard environment, malicious traffic gets too close to production before decisive filtering happens. That is where saturation, invoice spikes and overly destructive emergency responses begin.

Classic model risks under DDoS
When malicious traffic gets too close to production, the risk is not only technical. It becomes operational and financial as well.

What is protected IP transit anti-DDoS?

Protected IP transit anti-DDoS means that the traffic destined to your IP prefixes is carried through a mitigation infrastructure able to filter the attack upstream and then deliver only legitimate traffic back to your infrastructure.

Unlike a closed protection model or mitigation based only on rigid static profiles, this design preserves real control over the network architecture, delivery methods and the way traffic is handed back to the customer.

  • carry the traffic through a mitigation infrastructure
  • filter attacks upstream
  • deliver only legitimate traffic to the final infrastructure
  • keep flexibility on BGP, tunnels and delivery models

How protected transit works in practice

The customer announces IP prefixes through BGP. From there, several models are possible: using protected transit permanently, activating it only during attacks — which is less ideal because BGP convergence time still matters — or choosing symmetric or asymmetric routing depending on operational constraints.

At Peeryx, asymmetric routing is not a degraded mode. A customer can ingest traffic through Peeryx while keeping outbound traffic local through another transit provider if that improves latency or commercial efficiency. That does not reduce mitigation quality.

Once traffic reaches the mitigation fabric, the goal is not blind rate limiting. The goal is to understand legitimate traffic, detect the attack, generate the right filtering logic and deliver clean traffic back at line rate.

1. BGP integration

The customer announces the prefixes and chooses a permanent or attack-triggered operating mode.

2. Traffic analysis

Legitimate traffic is continuously observed so a usable baseline exists when an attack starts.

3. Rule generation

As soon as the attack is detected, custom filters are generated from the live signatures and the service’s real behaviour.

4. Clean delivery

Filtered traffic is handed back through cross-connect, GRE, IPIP, VXLAN or a router VM depending on the architecture.

Automatic adaptive mitigation

Many solutions on the market rely mainly on predefined mitigation profiles. That can fit some very standard use cases, especially classic gaming patterns, but it becomes limiting when legitimate traffic does not match the expected template.

By contrast, Peeryx does not force restrictive application filters by default. Optional predefined policies can be added when they are useful — for example for FiveM, Minecraft, Rust, Garry’s Mod, Hytale, SSH, WireGuard or OpenVPN — but the baseline platform behaviour is adaptive.

The system continuously analyses legitimate traffic outside mitigation windows to understand usage, normal flows and service-specific characteristics. When an attack is detected, it correlates signatures and patterns with that baseline and generates custom rules in under 20 ms to stop the attack without blocking useful traffic.

Static vs adaptive mitigation
The difference is not only headline Gbps. The real difference appears when the attack must be blocked without damaging legitimate traffic.

Clean traffic delivery

Clean traffic can be delivered with or without BGP announcement on the handoff side. The point is to adapt to the customer architecture rather than forcing a single interconnection model.

Concrete use cases

Why this approach is more advanced

This approach is not only about “holding Gbps”. It is about understanding the protected service, preserving its application logic and handling the reality of PPS pressure as well. Some solutions can advertise impressive bandwidth figures while being less comfortable when the real pressure is primarily packet-rate driven.

Another important point is what does not happen during mitigation: no generic protocol rate limiting is applied on TCP, UDP, GRE or other protocols. Mitigation should not slow down legitimate transfers or artificially cap performance simply because protection is active.

For truly extreme floods, especially some volumetric amplification scenarios, BGP FlowSpec can be used automatically and intelligently, but only when there is a real need, for light upstream relief and for a short time. The goal is not to become overly strict. The goal is to shave enough volume off the top without sacrificing legitimate traffic.

Adaptive mitigation chain
Baseline analysis, attack detection, custom rule generation and selective FlowSpec form a coherent chain, not a pile of static filters.
  • no rigid rules forced by default
  • no generic blocking without understanding the service
  • continuous awareness of legitimate traffic
  • designed for both Gbps and Mpps realities
  • selective BGP FlowSpec usage only when it is truly needed

Common mistakes to avoid

A good anti-DDoS design must protect the link, the bill, the user experience and the business logic of the service. If it only protects one of those layers, it remains incomplete.

  • Focusing only on Gbps when PPS is often the real limiting factor.
  • Choosing a generic protection model for traffic that does not fit standard patterns.
  • Ignoring routing design even though symmetric and asymmetric models can have very different commercial and latency implications.
  • Assuming protected transit replaces every complementary layer when a multi-layer design is often still the cleanest operational model.

FAQ

Can I keep my current infrastructure?

Yes. Clean traffic can be delivered back through tunnels or through a BGP design adapted to the infrastructure you already have.

Does mitigation impact performance?

No. There is no generic protocol rate limiting applied during mitigation.

Will legitimate traffic be blocked?

The whole purpose of the platform is to avoid that by generating filters from the service’s real traffic and the patterns observed during the attack.

Is it suitable for very large attacks?

Yes. And for extreme cases, BGP FlowSpec can be used in a short and selective way to shave the volume without damaging legitimate traffic.

Conclusion

Protected IP transit anti-DDoS is now a core building block for exposed infrastructures that want to avoid saturation, unnecessary blackholing and overly destructive generic responses.

It allows massive attacks to be absorbed, protects services without forcing a full migration, preserves real routing control and adapts mitigation to each workload instead of imposing static profiles.

Modern solutions should not only advertise capacity numbers. They should be able to understand legitimate traffic and adapt dynamically to the real behaviour of the service under protection.

Go deeper into the architecture

These pages help move from a standalone article to a clearer understanding of the offers and delivery model.

Resources

Related reading

To go deeper, here are other useful pages and articles.

Volumetric mitigation 9 min read

How do you mitigate a DDoS attack above 100Gbps?

Link, PPS, CPU, upstream relief and clean handoff: the real framework behind credible 100Gbps mitigation.

Read the article
BGP & mitigation 8 min read

BGP Flowspec for DDoS: useful or dangerous?

What Flowspec does well, what it should never do alone and how to fit it into a safe multi-layer strategy.

Read the article
Upstream pre-filtering 8 min read

Upstream Anti-DDoS pre-filtering: when to use it and why it changes everything

Upstream Anti-DDoS pre-filtering is meant to relieve pressure early, protect links and reduce load before fine-grained decision layers take over. This guide explains when to use it, what it should actually do and why it changes the global cost/performance ratio. It also helps compare upstream Anti-DDoS pre-filtering, link relief, volumetric reduction and layered mitigation with an operator-grade architecture, operations and buying logic.

Read the article
Filtering server 11 min read

Dedicated Anti-DDoS filtering server: what is it really for?

A dedicated Anti-DDoS filtering server separates production from the decision layer, enables more precise logic and keeps the existing stack behind it. This guide explains when the model makes sense, when it does not and how to place it cleanly inside the architecture. It also helps compare dedicated Anti-DDoS filtering server, upstream filtering, clean handoff and production architecture with an operator-grade architecture, operations and buying logic.

Read the article
Clean traffic delivery 8 min read

Anti-DDoS clean traffic delivery: why the handoff matters as much as mitigation

In Anti-DDoS architecture, mitigation alone is not enough: legitimate traffic still has to be delivered back correctly. This guide explains why clean traffic handoff matters as much as scrubbing, how to choose the right delivery model and which mistakes break daily operations. It also helps compare clean traffic delivery, clean handoff, GRE, IPIP, VXLAN and cross-connect with an operator-grade architecture, operations and buying logic.

Read the article
Gaming Anti-DDoS 9 min read

Gaming Anti-DDoS: why generic filtering is not always enough

Gaming needs Anti-DDoS protection built around sessions, latency, false positives and real protocol behaviour. This guide explains why generic filtering is not always enough and how to design a more serious gaming protection model. It also helps compare gaming Anti-DDoS, false positives, session stability and game-specific filtering with an operator-grade architecture, operations and buying logic.

Read the article
Performance comparison 9 min read

XDP vs DPDK for Anti-DDoS filtering: which one should you choose?

The XDP vs DPDK Anti-DDoS question comes up all the time. This guide gives a practical answer for network and security teams: what XDP does extremely well, when DPDK becomes the right tool and which approach usually offers the best cost, performance and operations ratio.

Read the article
Deployment guide 10 min read

Protect an existing dedicated server with GRE or BGP

How to keep an OVH or Hetzner server in production and get legitimate traffic back without rebuilding the whole infrastructure.

Read the article
Technical comparison Reading time: 8 min

GRE, BGP or protected IPs: which model fits best?

The strengths, limits and deployment cases of the main anti-DDoS delivery models depending on topology and network control.

Read the article
Routing & latency Reading time: 9 min

Latency, asymmetry and clean traffic delivery

Why the traffic path, local egress and handoff model matter as much as raw mitigation capacity.

Read the article

Need a design adapted to your real traffic?

Peeryx provides protected IP transit anti-DDoS, symmetric or asymmetric routing, adaptive mitigation based on legitimate traffic, delivery through GRE, IPIP, VXLAN or cross-connect, and an architecture designed to protect without breaking what makes the service work.