[101102] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Tue Dec 18 02:12:02 2007
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:11:02 -0800
From: "Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: "Paul Ferguson" <fergdawg@netzero.net>
Cc: smb@cs.columbia.edu, Sean.Siler@microsoft.com, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20071217.215909.25786.2@webmail07.vgs.untd.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Dec 17, 2007 9:59 PM, Paul Ferguson <fergdawg@netzero.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> - -- "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@cs.columbia.edu> wrote:
>
> [re: v6 mythos]
>
> >In a slightly more realistic vein, a huge address space makes life
> >harder for scanning worms. As Angelos Keromytis, Bill Cheswick, and I
> >have pointed out, "harder" is by no means equivalent to "impossible",
> >but the myth, new as it is, still propagates.
>
> And in fact, "threat propagation" in a v6 world may actually
> be worse than expected, and naivet=E9 may actually contribute to
> a larger-scale attack, given the statistical possibility of
> potentially more victims.
>
naivete because folks believe the 'v6 is more secure' propoganda? or
some other reason?
> Address space size, and proximity, may well be red herrings in
> this discussion.
can you expand on this some?
