IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] control and security of DHCP

Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> Wed, 15 January 2014 19:13 UTC

Return-Path: <owen@delong.com>
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 0378A1AE13F for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 11:13:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.528
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.528 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.538, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] 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 zjOltP-EWCLx for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 11:13:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A217F1AE12A for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 11:13:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2620::930:0:ca2a:14ff:fe3e:d024] ([IPv6:2620:0:930:0:ca2a:14ff:fe3e:d024]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s0FJ8XSu020079 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 15 Jan 2014 11:08:34 -0800
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s0FJ8XSu020079
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1389812915; bh=/g0sTJUJsm1aI1gVlYr2HphLyOQ=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Message-Id:References:To; b=xwDtbIYDGYO3z4edlxEwe+/rbFxbvpzdL8VH4doEssQteXC2HksEibemo+t7vFAns COUp3AB9gSqSiBrgCut9rrQtyVAMD+b8PwHEId5WEsyf9Ug+DKTjFsQz9pHGviCycs cAwdVpw+HPNK4hbzVf3FLw83vPdbw/Ov0zcGPl2I=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_56D94978-0FCE-4A5E-AA22-9C970539B09E"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <EMEW3|a3d075fc053a7d251459ec8edca9e383q0EC8p03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|02C4DFC9-847B-47B9-84B3-99967FCF2DE2@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 11:08:40 -0800
Message-Id: <952FF407-0A03-48B4-802E-8DA36C4C1A1F@delong.com>
References: <1808340F7EC362469DDFFB112B37E2FCDA31A30EB1@SRVHKE02.rdm.cz> <52CFB8D5.70900@gmail.com> <B54D5283-8880-434A-A3C0-9BFF0081E13B@gmail.com> <20140110.124610.74672987.sthaug@nethelp.no> <60C5513D-B8DA-48D6-82D3-53E148F9F7BA@gmail.com> <52D0157D.6040009@foobar.org> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1401101651580.20074@uplift.swm.pp.se> <D1FC3C0B-CC5D-44BC-B753-2F1BD94A48FA@nominum.com> <CAKD1Yr1C0jRNq-ta=HeGFusC8VFGGg1ffDFLoroUoiHmX-KYiA@mail.gmail.com> <52D18F22.1070708@foobar.org> <CAKD1Yr2PrG_Rit2YCAkep4_-LUSqNpEU-t+ttRsLPpSbYVLoig@mail.gmail.com> <1389490607.51957.YahooMailNeo@web161904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <52D2A8EF.2040901@foobar.org> <52D4E794.3070109@globis.net> <52D57214.1070505@foobar.org> <52D57DC5.9080603@globis.net> <52D58413.3050506@foobar.org> <CAKD1Yr2WMzfi0_s34h4Q2EiQp=YFor78hsUiB8fVbGMyojEU1Q@mail.gmail.com> <02C4DFC9-847B-47B9-84B3-99967FCF2DE2@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <EMEW3|a3d075fc053a7d251459ec8edca9e383q0EC8p03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|02C4DFC9-847B-47B9-84B3-99967FCF2DE2@ecs! .soton.ac.uk>
To: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]); Wed, 15 Jan 2014 11:08:35 -0800 (PST)
Cc: Ray Hunter <v6ops@globis.net>, "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] control and security of DHCP
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, 15 Jan 2014 19:13:22 -0000

On Jan 15, 2014, at 04:08 , Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:

> 
> On 14 Jan 2014, at 18:52, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
>> > So what security are you suggesting to deploy to ensure that your set up
>> > remains sufficiently isolated between customers, even though they share a
>> > L2 LAN?
>> 
>> Right now?  I have nothing.  I can't deploy ipv6 without holes large enough
>> to drive trucks through.
>> 
>> You can't give every customer their own /64? 
> 
> As a slight aside, we found that at certain vendors charge rather more for images with L3 functionality than for L2 functionality, so it costs more in real £££ to put /64 per interface.  So even if the device is capable of doing it, it's frustrating that there's a tiered pricing structure.  I'd rather the vendor recognised the potential change in IPv6 usage here and had price parity (on the lower price!).
> 

There certainly are vendors who do, so it seems to me that this is a valid vendor selection criteria.

Owen

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email