nanog mailing list archives
Re: legacy /8
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 13:39:48 -0400
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 12:31:28 EDT, William Warren said:
On 4/3/2010 1:39 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:
Given that currently most stuff is dual-stack, and IPv6 isn't totally widespread, what are the effects of doing IPv6 DDoS mitigation by simply turning off IPv6 on your upstream link and letting traffic fall back to IPv4 where you have mitigation gear?
Not a valid argument. When ipv6 gets widely used then the DDOS will follow it.
Totally valid. IPv6 isn't heavily used *currently*, so it may be perfectly acceptable to deal with the mythological IPv6 DDoS by saying "screw it, turn off the IPv6 prefix, deal with customers on IPv4-only for a few hours". After all, that's *EXACTLY* the way you're doing business now - IPv4 only. So that's obviously a viable way to deal with an IPv6 DDoS - do *exactly what you're doing now*.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: legacy /8, (continued)
- Re: legacy /8 bmanning (Apr 02)
- Re: legacy /8 Cutler James R (Apr 02)
- Re: legacy /8 Jeroen van Aart (Apr 03)
- Re: legacy /8 Jim Burwell (Apr 03)
- Re: legacy /8 Jeffrey Lyon (Apr 03)
- Re: legacy /8 Valdis . Kletnieks (Apr 03)
- Re: legacy /8 Leen Besselink (Apr 04)
- Re: legacy /8 Roland Perry (Apr 04)
- Re: legacy /8 Zaid Ali (Apr 04)
- Re: legacy /8 William Warren (Apr 11)
- Re: legacy /8 Valdis . Kletnieks (Apr 11)
- Re: legacy /8 Dobbins, Roland (Apr 11)
- Re: legacy /8 Owen DeLong (Apr 04)
- Re: legacy /8 Roland Perry (Apr 04)
- Re: legacy /8 Joe Greco (Apr 04)
- Re: legacy /8 Roland Perry (Apr 04)
- Commodore PET, was: Re: legacy /8 Jeroen van Aart (Apr 11)
- Re: Commodore PET, was: Re: legacy /8 Paul Vixie (Apr 11)
- alt.folklore.nanog (was:Re: Commodore PET, was: Re: legacy /8) Lamar Owen (Apr 14)
- Re: alt.folklore.nanog Jeroen van Aart (Apr 14)
- Re: legacy /8 Steven Bellovin (Apr 02)