IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] comment on draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis

Arturo Servin <arturo.servin@gmail.com> Tue, 05 November 2013 18:17 UTC

Return-Path: <arturo.servin@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 B193611E8118 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 10:17:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.224
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.224 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.225, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vFnA++XEVyvM for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 10:17:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-we0-x229.google.com (mail-we0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E80E011E8119 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 10:17:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-we0-f169.google.com with SMTP id q58so3903903wes.14 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Nov 2013 10:17:02 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=Sia+Dphe3XawRSLr8kA41potCRjrkPT3MegK/AlWmhc=; b=fo7wpQvxW5g5ivekBzypLWPejNcu3B2FhepxfF89DArQOaejbZ8rjQKmk9IKZkIXvi qASsR9Q7r0CKHJcHf0nN/w6vcACq6kCCPzbkFCEUg8EBtyG10rPGoKq9vbMk3xAq0jDH ASZncbvoiW65QQS5HIWCj23L7pBx76FJu+0RNQgEP+VLuzwQdmiXIGKRTVnJuZalvOnl VoCGnLbr3cyyuL/nnjsIEPke94cLtNAg3FCnPl/ESmzZarWS4+f9VQ0iwryJf+bXArlc 0of2Hf+bGHLZQnL3s4wNt153zA23jx8NUVN7KYfBNW66NM0uydxA5pXROtRVUkNMIBe6 tIlg==
X-Received: by 10.180.78.165 with SMTP id c5mr18118618wix.3.1383675422566; Tue, 05 Nov 2013 10:17:02 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.194.42.4 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 10:16:42 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAFU7BAR3C8FwU49CsWua20Tmz24Jzd6UVuN=Aoea8Z03drvELQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFU7BAR3C8FwU49CsWua20Tmz24Jzd6UVuN=Aoea8Z03drvELQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Arturo Servin <arturo.servin@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 16:16:42 -0200
Message-ID: <CALo9H1b1EFtjExsy89gLtPmWPoYc1DqmigfLrybPdxm0OsKKdw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f46d04388e670bf32304ea720ab3"
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] comment on draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 18:17:14 -0000

Blocking according to DNS content would be something like Deep Packet
Inspection, isn't it?

Do we want to go there?

/as


On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> wrote:

> Section 4.2. says that
> "
>
> So when using ULAs in a network, the administrators should clearly
>    set the scope of the ULAs and configure ACLs on relevant border
>    routers to block them out of the scope. And if internal DNS are
>    enabled, the administrators might also need to use internal-only DNS
>    names for ULAs.
> "
> I believe it should that that the administrator MUST configure egress
> ACLs on borders routers and MUST ensure that their DNS servers do not
> include ULAs in any responses to external clients.
>
>
>
>
> --
> SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email