IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Thoughts about wider operational input

Joe Maimon <jmaimon@jmaimon.com> Wed, 30 March 2022 15:57 UTC

Return-Path: <jmaimon@jmaimon.com>
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 0474C3A101D; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 08:57:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] 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 imU1P-xRnjNO; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 08:57:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.chl.com (bindzonemaster.ttec.chl.com [216.222.148.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94C933A11F9; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 08:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [216.222.150.100] (joe.ttec.chl.com [216.222.150.100]) by smtp.chl.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id 22UFuqdG014737; Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:56:52 -0500
To: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet=40consulintel.es@dmarc.ietf.org>, v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
References: <52661a3d-75dc-111a-3f23-09b10d7cb8d4@gmail.com> <A72CDDDB-CDCE-4EAF-B95E-997C764DB2C4@gmail.com> <9175dc32-45c1-e948-c20a-3bcc958b77b9@gmail.com> <YjmJQMNgnJoSInUw@Space.Net> <D75EF08F-6A41-41B2-AFB2-649CBCC1D83E@consulintel.es> <CAPt1N1nRnYUFA=yyJHx6t52yqWbmcd2Tf1H8gQuCZBd3Q3VqJw@mail.gmail.com> <7F4AEB43-4B24-4A21-AE9D-3EB512B98C46@consulintel.es> <8fac4314b8244ba6b33eea68694296d0@huawei.com> <9A13E47B-75D0-443F-9EE9-D2917ACB2D0F@consulintel.es> <CAO42Z2xUG+BXj+VQpajed9aGjH+q-HR7RX7C-T4DsTbouz7xWQ@mail.gmail.com> <F6A90BBF-7F44-403E-960A-8F756353B562@chinatelecom.cn> <B49417F7-3EFB-4A4D-9D1A-0D21574EA4F2@consulintel.es> <44B01ACA-3D5C-4618-B608-3B3479D29875@consulintel.es>
From: Joe Maimon <jmaimon@jmaimon.com>
Message-ID: <62447DCB.1010206@jmaimon.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 11:56:59 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.2; rv:43.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/43.0 SeaMonkey/2.40
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <44B01ACA-3D5C-4618-B608-3B3479D29875@consulintel.es>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/W3DgUChVEK5qn7HI0czneiUArlI>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Thoughts about wider operational input
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: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 15:57:08 -0000


JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
>
> To demonstrate how NAT is not security, you just need to enable Teredo 
> or any other UDP tunneling traversing the NAT, so the security guys 
> can see that without any special config in the NAT, you can dig a 
> whole on it (Teredo Navalis = Shipworm).
>
> Regards,
>
> Jordi
>
> @jordipalet
>

And then you need to demonstrate how the equivalent would not happen on 
IPv6.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email