IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Asrg] Spam and IPv6

David Maxwell <david@crlf.net> Wed, 19 May 2004 23:08 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (www.iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA27302 for <asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 19:08:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQZyK-0001v4-Rg for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:55:37 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4JMtaH8007373 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:55:36 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQZx0-0001ZR-AK for asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:54:14 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA26742 for <asrg-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:54:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQZwx-0006R3-4z for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:54:11 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQZw4-0006L5-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:53:17 -0400
Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQZvj-0006EX-00 for asrg-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:52:55 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQZp4-0007gb-OW; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:46:02 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQZhV-0005E4-Gm for asrg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:38:13 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA25738 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:38:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQZhS-0004U2-BJ for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:38:10 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQZgc-0004Mn-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:37:18 -0400
Received: from mail.crlf.net ([216.126.92.195]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQZfz-0004G8-00 for asrg@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:36:39 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.crlf.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D054D1F07E; Wed, 19 May 2004 18:36:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Maxwell <david@crlf.net>
To: Jim Witte <jswitte@bloomington.in.us>
Cc: asrg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Spam and IPv6
Message-ID: <20040519223633.GE547@mail>
References: <6E936DBF-A9D5-11D8-88D5-000393DC31DA@bloomington.in.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6E936DBF-A9D5-11D8-88D5-000393DC31DA@bloomington.in.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i
Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 18:36:33 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60

On Wed, 19 May 2004, Jim Witte wrote:
>   Does IPv6 add anything to the spam puzzle?  Because with IPv6, the 
> address space is so big that every person and his dog on Earth could 
> potentially have a separate address.  Would that make 
> tracking/controlling stuff easier?

Concievably is makes blacklisting harder. When address space is not a
scarce resource, it's likely to be easy to renumber your attack
machines. (Quite aside from the IPv6 goals of making renumbering easier)

Whitelisting wouldn't seem to change much.

I've speculated before that running an MTA on IPv6 only might greatly
reduce your incoming spam (and mail) until spammers decide to bother
with IPv6. Certainly the number of zombie hosts on v6 would be lower as
well - for now.

-- 
David Maxwell, david@vex.net|david@maxwell.net --> Mastery of UNIX, like
mastery of language, offers real freedom. The price of freedom is always dear,
but there's no substitute. Personally, I'd rather pay for my freedom than live
in a bitmapped, pop-up-happy dungeon like NT. - Thomas Scoville 


_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email