IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Please review the No IPv4 draft

Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> Tue, 15 April 2014 15:29 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.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 9C9F31A01A8 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 08:29:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.172
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.172 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272] autolearn=ham
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 TTu-jD865fjb for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 08:29:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B85661A0176 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 08:29:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B68331B8055 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 08:29:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B02CB19005C; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 08:29:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.0.175] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Tue, 15 Apr 2014 08:29:46 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
From: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr0j5+r6K8APoFageJz2RESKj5vkk10Ybom0p3Vec_G0YQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 10:29:44 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <E7619537-7E58-404F-8F31-927EBEFA79B8@nominum.com>
References: <534BF5A5.5010609@viagenie.ca> <CAKD1Yr0j5+r6K8APoFageJz2RESKj5vkk10Ybom0p3Vec_G0YQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/xZQTZZeWlvgCNcexcAZcw0GgWgg
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: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 15:29:51 -0000

On Apr 14, 2014, at 11:20 PM, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:
> I don't see a strong use case for this. It seems to me that the two scenarios in the introduction can be solved by simply configuring the DHCPv4 relay (or the server, if on-link) to drop all DHCPv4 requests.

In a v6-only network, there would be no relay, so you'd get this effect for free.

> Am I missing something?

Broadcast traffic on Wifi.   Vulnerability to on-link IPv4 attacks.   Otherwise, probably no.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email