Re: [v6ops] RFC7217 and flash renumbering and IID change

Simon Hobson <linux@thehobsons.co.uk> Sun, 13 December 2020 19:53 UTC

Return-Path: <linux@thehobsons.co.uk>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38E013A0755 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 11:53:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.003
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 IyO0Jfms-6xX for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 11:53:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from patsy.thehobsons.co.uk (patsy.thehobsons.co.uk [80.229.10.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5058F3A074E for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 11:53:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at patsy.thehobsons.co.uk
Received: from [192.168.137.104] (unknown [192.168.137.104]) by patsy.thehobsons.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C389A64028 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 19:53:02 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Simon Hobson <linux@thehobsons.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <28ec97ca-355b-e4d8-200d-1c14160b51c0@si6networks.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 19:53:01 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4AC2A13C-9FE6-4D2C-B14C-D1DCC3169700@thehobsons.co.uk>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.20.2012111147020.10335@uplift.swm.pp.se> <28ec97ca-355b-e4d8-200d-1c14160b51c0@si6networks.com>
To: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/S-KUSDtpIe4ncZEq1JwQcPHB4Bk>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] RFC7217 and flash renumbering and IID change
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 19:53:10 -0000

Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> wrote:

> So it should be the host talking to the firewall and telling what to do with which address.  -- with e.g. something like UPnP.

So we're back to each host deciding on the security policy for the network - not a network admin (as a proxy for the owners of the site/network).

I make a point of disabling upnp as one of the first steps when setting up a network. Who wants ${random device which may or may not be "friendly"} to be able to determine what traffic is allowed into the network - it's not like there is anyone out there in the wild west of the internet who'd have any hostile intent :-/

Simon