IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Google Alert - IPv6

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 18 October 2017 21:22 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.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 56EBD1321C9 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:22:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 tAnOcdMHYwKt for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf0-x230.google.com (mail-pf0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CCC21320DC for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id p87so4886751pfj.3 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=dlNY11suPOcCyaNz/mJS9wD/RLd0MKsUesEpfDeBxzo=; b=COZwMo9nPn6JDcNXuEEiLceU0af6+7+mOgA0a1ELws3TYxCrIvO+F82uBzPW/likGi gK2gpCt34DUF5GNCSAtfjluaYJ6tjEAY4OWs/jBjV/JRtaFXT9UZYITUPqEGVM83PMac uI6q88RWvCTG+esZ5zMudgihX4WA8tM0/tDy/qltSMZ7DjyS7K8XC07HkXCttXlYoIsh /gga3GOR2C4I3A8SUc6PzMLOINlz3QAmNM9u5ghkFxr/hGax5n1/8bpKCrNlqPu7s5ux pizJkhn7VChuFBtFCVDniTfOUO3CINz3p57x7DeGKOf+PgoUjMIueqipW7WPZocEU0h4 h01Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=dlNY11suPOcCyaNz/mJS9wD/RLd0MKsUesEpfDeBxzo=; b=sf06EvuGg6b34V0vSCmgEmlgbWcfse0SY24+Do4Fv7hqdaMudgkT3b5ehNT07LZMKH 3xZLTrj2j5IECd81saQ4pYEhic/gdSP3yp0eqb3E6ONDyl/kbrd3XP1PMfqzwD3mohf1 KGJRzN77QVqxam3/Ip+paLqhH/mFdn91O4rEQZfwmQqHr4TH0sfBbjAWA9QbVaaNaVBt R+juZozmSdgSFSaazPY6yEVa8UVbqOXZGhRxX4FenML/D/jPJDrC4oG01JgiALqV7e+Q 5ROsjq12+D3W63GQQZLTLM92kl3yl0lE5sd0+MTlftGDZ53zt5TYDDjCH9h/tiGDOIYA BQDg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaWhhkVBqnrrFyTqW9DWs1f5yhBIOJ2wso34cMHk/T8Xlc04GbLX nFh+I0M5Y9ua4IEacvIQfC70uRwl
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QBKJdC1MaRYL/7I9qWKC62QhWxD+WB9MKvreeaYVY/2D19TvBS64T9BOWCO8By+cPxSUwlfTw==
X-Received: by 10.101.80.202 with SMTP id s10mr15000528pgp.150.1508361743160; Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:22:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2607:fb90:9d0d:740a:443b:515:5269:d2d0? ([2607:fb90:9d0d:740a:443b:515:5269:d2d0]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c9sm20911752pfj.76.2017.10.18.14.22.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:22:22 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-952DF2E3-6B9E-46C1-BF83-B9FBFC001EF3"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15A432)
In-Reply-To: <f403045ef57ac52962055bd88b84@google.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:22:20 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20395E98-DA55-447F-BEFE-CB581A88BB78@gmail.com>
References: <f403045ef57ac52962055bd88b84@google.com>
To: v6ops@ietf.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/lVU4b3rFfY-JDr0QnkJBiUUmTMQ>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Google Alert - IPv6
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 18 Oct 2017 21:22:25 -0000

So, this may be a dumb question. IPv6 advocates will reflexively agree with comments on “CGNAT is a bad idea”. But as operators who very likely have some combination of IPv6 and CGNAT, do we have thoughtful experience-based comments on this topic?

> On Oct 18, 2017, at 2:01 PM, Google Alerts <googlealerts-noreply@google.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>  	
> IPv6
> Daily update ⋅ October 18, 2017
> NEWS	
> Europol wants ISPs to aid law enforcement by dropping CGN technologies
> Help Net Security
> CGN was meant to be a temporary workaround for the problem arising from the slow transition from IPv4 to IPv6. But, according to Europol, for some ...
> Europol cops lean on phone networks, ISPs to dump CGNAT walls that 'hide' cyber-crooks - The Register
> CGN has created an "online capability gap" between cyber criminals and law enforcement, says ... - www.v3.co.uk
> Full Coverage
>   	  	  	Flag as irrelevant  
> Europol Calls on Internet Providers to End CGNAT IP Address Sharing
> ISPreview.co.uk (blog)
> However the shift from the old IPv4 (ran out of spare addresses) to newer IPv6 addressing system has caused some providers, which don't have a ...
>   	  	  	Flag as irrelevant  
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email