IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Please review the No IPv4 draft

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Wed, 30 April 2014 09:35 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
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 1C59A1A08B7 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 02:35:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.194
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.194 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 wr6hS-QDx5Ea for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 02:35:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [83.247.10.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1D8A1A06DB for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 02:35:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADB8D4C; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:35:25 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z-Dgn8RjO4CY; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:35:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from macpro.10ww.steffann.nl (macpro.10ww.steffann.nl [37.77.56.75]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F0C5B38; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:35:16 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.0\))
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
In-Reply-To: <37DC9152-EEE3-4EEF-81C7-AD5B6D0E9892@nominum.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 11:35:16 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B5BC5D48-3D5D-40A4-89F6-B0E1AEC860D6@steffann.nl>
References: <9B4139A3-77F7-4109-93AD-A822395E5007@nominum.com> <m24n1l8i1a.wl%Niall.oReilly@ucd.ie> <3BA3E5A3-4385-43CE-B73F-A0686AA31B4E@nominum.com> <m238gxpgrt.wl%Niall.oReilly@ucd.ie> <73221D87-5F50-4689-AA42-553AF757ABF5@nominum.com> <m2mwf59uht.wl%Niall.oReilly@ucd.ie> <7310412C-64E9-4A11-9812-92A969082131@nominum.com> <20140428190804.GK43641@Space.Net> <446A720E-1128-4FFF-BB3B-780EACA9610B@nominum.com> <535EBC20.10900@foobar.org> <20140428213045.GL511@havarti.local> <19B5B5AB-FF86-408B-8E73-D5350853965B@foobar.org> <3563D9EE-CD40-4E75-A1CB-C3FB50EEEBC4@nominum.com> <535F3624.4020801@foobar.org> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1404290726011.29282@uplift.swm.pp.se> <535F3A8C.2050902@foobar.org> <E68028C1-2E6D-4D07-A113-60757457E286@nominum.com> <535F99A9.3030402@foobar.org> <0C03200E-B349-44D4-BE3F-512AD6A7A417@nominum.com> <535FCB2C.3030502@foobar.org> <8DB83B3D-D09C-4977-9B4F-75EA2DD3B71D@nominum.com> <53601BED.4050200@foobar.org> <37DC9152-EEE3-4EEF-81C7-AD5B6D0E9892@nominum.com>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/hKrDEjnMa6Lxx-Zw_5TJGeniBxo
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Please review the No IPv4 draft
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: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 09:35:30 -0000

Hi Ted,

> Fernando's draft actually suggests filtering ethertype 0x86DD in order to avoid RA attacks on switches that don't have RA guard, which is why I assumed that that was an option for IPv4-only networks that don't want to be affected by this proposal.

Ouch, a solution like that would then increase the cost of deploying IPv6 later on. I agree it is effective to prevent (rogue) IPv6 stuff, but it would be a bit too effective for my taste.

Cheers :)
Sander

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email