[125662] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chris Adams)
Tue Apr 20 20:47:15 2010
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 19:46:26 -0500
From: Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Mail-Followup-To: Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net>, nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <6784.1271805348@localhost>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Once upon a time, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> said:
> In any case, to a first-order approximation, it doesn't even matter all that
> much security wise. I mean - let's be *honest* guys. After XP SP2 got any
> significant market penetration, pretty much everybody had a host-based firewall
> that defaulted to default-deny, so the NAT-firewall was merely belt and
> suspenders.
Well, that covers the hosts. "Normal" people are adding more devices
than PCs all the time, such as network printers (which have a very
spotty security record, especially on the cheap end) and disk servers.
Network devices like that _can't_ just block all access.
--
Chris Adams <cmadams@hiwaay.net>
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble.
