[142847] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NDP DoS attack (was Re: Anybody can participate in the IETF (Was:
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Thu Jul 14 23:13:06 2011
In-Reply-To: <4E1FAC94.8030209@gont.com.ar>
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 23:12:15 -0400
To: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gashinsky-v6nd-enhance-00
Sent from my iThing
On Jul 14, 2011, at 10:57 PM, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> wrote:
> On 07/14/2011 11:35 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
>>> Well, unless there's some layer-2 anti-spoofing mitigation in
>>> place, with /64 subnets the "local attacker" typically *will* have
>>> enough addresses.
>>
>> Solving a local attack
>
> Well, I was talking about not *introducing* ;-) one.
>
>
>> is something I consider different in scope
>> than the current draft being discussed in 6man, v6ops, ipv6@ etc...
>
> Which I-D are you referring to?
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Fernando Gont
> e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org
> PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
>
>
