[110165] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven M. Bellovin)
Sat Dec 27 15:23:33 2008
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 15:23:25 -0500
From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@cs.columbia.edu>
To: "Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net>
In-Reply-To: <20081227043742.008B44500F@ptavv.es.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 20:37:41 -0800
"Kevin Oberman" <oberman@es.net> wrote:
> The main reason I prefer ISIS is that it uses CLNS packets for
> communications and we don't route CLNS. (I don't think ANYONE is
> routing CLNS today.) That makes it pretty secure.
Unless, of course, someone one hop away -- a peer? a customer? an
upstream or downstream? someone on the same LAN at certain exchange
points? -- sends you a CLNP packet at link level...
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
