IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Interesting problems with using IPv6

Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> Thu, 11 September 2014 12:36 UTC

Return-Path: <brian@innovationslab.net>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF9FB1A0860 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 05:36:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nOVQ0f2VSpZ9 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 05:36:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uillean.fuaim.com (uillean.fuaim.com [206.197.161.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2CC211A0709 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 05:36:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from clairseach.fuaim.com (clairseach-high.fuaim.com [206.197.161.158]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by uillean.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 099DE88122; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 05:36:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1025297146.rude2.ra.johnshopkins.edu (addr16212925014.ippl.jhmi.edu [162.129.250.14]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by clairseach.fuaim.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FA3971B0001; Thu, 11 Sep 2014 05:36:00 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5411972F.4050407@innovationslab.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 08:35:59 -0400
From: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
References: <1410082125488.85722@surrey.ac.uk> <540CB702.3000605@gmail.com> <20140908183339.GB98785@ricotta.doit.wisc.edu> <540E26D9.3070907@gmail.com> <540E7DC3.8060408@gont.com.ar> <540EAA55.7000207@gmail.com> <540F0BCF.1060905@gont.com.ar> <540F3432.5030702@innovationslab.net> <540F65C4.7050503@gmail.com> <540F9FA9.3070300@si6networks.com> <540FB46F.2010200@gmail.com> <CAPi140MmfaqG9kFNTdAi=RhH8YJDV2OVXYvi4FgxvkD_mEQx=Q@mail.gmail.com> <5410437E.2070208@innovationslab.net> <5410FBDB.1070507@gmail.com> <54110BDA.9000104@bogus.com>
In-Reply-To: <54110BDA.9000104@bogus.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qjPjdan1BPAHPuuRo8RfVwAFNFSja8ehe"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/KjHOFjMoIqDmAEvFXCen9QDbaZA
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Interesting problems with using IPv6
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 12:36:03 -0000

Hi Joel,

On 9/10/14 10:41 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> 
> Beware equating filtering with with inspection by the control plane,
> many asic based forwarding platforms ingress acl matches are never slow
> path. they wouldn't be useful for dos protection if they had to hit a cpu.
> 

Agreed.  What I am looking for is vendor input on whether Router Alerts
are still needed for IGMP/MLD messages.

Regards,
Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email