IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Network Scanning

"TJ" <trejrco@gmail.com> Fri, 04 April 2008 22:54 UTC

Return-Path: <ipv6-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ipv6-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 516623A6B05; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 15:54:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 090373A6B05 for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 15:54:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_42=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id etas861ZATfK for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 15:54:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com (wx-out-0506.google.com [66.249.82.229]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00F813A6AF8 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 15:54:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id i26so273558wxd.31 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Fri, 04 Apr 2008 15:54:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index:content-language; bh=ExfHtDIMbtBnROwf02g5qenNdZAppSgj+nf+3N6Mepg=; b=PTupxjVNaiDl2GMOOw1llWfxHOoyIaLoPfwSJT0Xdnwc0mZkPHAO7yGw/oYQpHzKKE85WlntV+97CmXdq92PT56P8Ucsy8/OAMBTjPBnW6VcBhXcJWWfP04pqtXVG0IODN1h9ju1tOIammeVxd1hDj5CXcO7xSAMXuhsbzJ2nuM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index:content-language; b=UoI94wT96jfkO+lcCtLayNxVoKVIlrODOrgPUATEAC1gupdYXQOlfbA20GqG1W5DPqrL6Sdx4Ryqi7L5N/V6uHuxhZmTdCe9aosdjI+g6ykOlUVTnuH/iSTXsmJwIScJgB+FxAnrtcMKq8ddY1Wo17+bYwFi6NhObqixoRLBhXM=
Received: by 10.70.92.18 with SMTP id p18mr2039098wxb.23.1207349697950; Fri, 04 Apr 2008 15:54:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Lapci010 ( [76.21.226.168]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h35sm17950362wxd.9.2008.04.04.15.54.55 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 04 Apr 2008 15:54:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: TJ <trejrco@gmail.com>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
References: <47F6A2D0.3040602@spaghetti.zurich.ibm.com> <200804042201.m34M1Jec007787@omr12.networksolutionsemail.com>
In-Reply-To: <200804042201.m34M1Jec007787@omr12.networksolutionsemail.com>
Subject: RE: Network Scanning
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 18:54:42 -0400
Message-ID: <004301c896a6$e5ff23e0$b1fd6ba0$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AciWniWbJoaIyT0aSSmECKkV+MqP+QAAScYAAAHI3hA=
Content-Language: en-us
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Brian McGehee
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 6:01 PM
> To: 'Jeroen Massar'; 'Prasanna Ram Venkatachalam'
> Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Network Scanning
> 
> "ping6 ff02::1
> 
> Which should make every single host on a link answer to it."
> 
> 
> Answer with it's link-local address, which is probably not the goal.

Unless autoconfiguration (SLAAC or Stateless DHCPv6) is in use and you can
derive the Global from the Link Local ... same EUI64.
Without more information, if you are on-link that ping is probably the
first/best approach.  
 	... although some OSes break the RFC and don't reply ... 

> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Jeroen Massar
> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 2:51 PM
> To: Prasanna Ram Venkatachalam
> Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Network Scanning
> 
> Prasanna Ram Venkatachalam wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > With the evolving IPv6 which will be a mandate soon(as far as i
> know),
> > the network discovery is going to be very difficult. Is there any
> > optimized way proposed so far which can be used with IPv6 for network
> > discovery??
> 
> ping6 ff02::1
> 
> Which should make every single host on a link answer to it.
> 
> For the rest, read the excellent paper by Steven M. Bellovin:
> 
> http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb/papers/v6worms.pdf
> 
> Greets,
>   Jeroen



/TJ

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email