nanog mailing list archives
Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space
From: "Robert E. Seastrom" <rs () seastrom com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 21:48:49 -0400
Actually, that's one of the most insightful meta-points I've seen on NANOG in a long time. There is a HUGE difference between IPv4 and IPv6 thinking. We've all been living in an austerity regime for so long that we've completely forgotten how to leave parsimony behind. Even those of us who worked at companies that were summarily handed a Class B when we mumbled something about "internal subnetting" have a really hard time remembering how to act when we suddenly don't have to answer for every single host address and can design a network to conserve other things (like our brain cells). -r -Hammer- <bhmccie () gmail com> writes:
<bashes head against wall> Thank you all. It's not the protocol that hurts. It's rethinking the culture/philosophy around it. -Hammer- On 7/14/12 3:20 PM, "Owen DeLong" <owen () delong com> wrote:They're a bad thing in IPv6. The only place for security through obscurity IMHO is a small round container that sits next to my desk. Besides, if you don't advertise it, a GUA prefix is just as obscure as a ULA prefix and provides a larger search space in which one has to hunt for it... Think /3 instead of /8. Owen On Jul 14, 2012, at 1:14 PM, -Hammer- wrote:Guys, The whole purpose of this is that they do NOT need to be global. Security thru obscurity. It actually has a place in some worlds. Does that make sense? Or are such V4-centric approaches a bad thing in v6? On 7/13/12 8:41 PM, "Brandon Ross" <bross () pobox com> wrote:On Fri, 13 Jul 2012, Owen DeLong wrote:On Jul 13, 2012, at 4:24 PM, Randy Bush wrote:keep life simple. use global ipv6 space. randyThough it is rare, this is one time when I absolutely agree with Randy.It's even more rare for me to agree with Randy AND Owen at the same time. -- Brandon Ross Yahoo & AIM: BrandonNRoss +1-404-635-6667 ICQ: 2269442 Schedule a meeting: https://tungle.me/bross Skype: brandonross
Current thread:
- RE: using "reserved" IPv6 space, (continued)
- RE: using "reserved" IPv6 space Leo Vegoda (Jul 13)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space TJ (Jul 13)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space -Hammer- (Jul 13)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Randy Bush (Jul 13)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Owen DeLong (Jul 13)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Brandon Ross (Jul 13)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space joseph . snyder (Jul 14)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space -Hammer- (Jul 14)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Owen DeLong (Jul 14)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space -Hammer- (Jul 14)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Robert E. Seastrom (Jul 14)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Brett Frankenberger (Jul 15)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Lee (Jul 15)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space John Levine (Jul 15)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Lee (Jul 16)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Karl Auer (Jul 16)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Owen DeLong (Jul 16)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Owen DeLong (Jul 16)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space -Hammer- (Jul 13)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space -Hammer- (Jul 16)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Owen DeLong (Jul 16)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space -Hammer- (Jul 16)