Hello, What kind of timeframe are we talking here ?
Thanks. Y. P.S : coming back to Paris anytime soon ? ;-) Le 28 août 2012 à 17:49, Greg Hankins <[email protected]> a écrit : > Hi Youssef, sorry that the NetIron does not support IPv6 /127s today. > We do have it scheduled on our roadmap for a future release. > > There is a pretty good panel presentation that Ron Bonica et al. gave at > NANOG a couple years ago that talks briefly about the options. We've put > in several IPv6 DDoS mitigation features that minimize the impact of > ND scanning. > > If I were running a network, I'd probably use a /64 as Ron suggests: > "Allocate /64 and use /64 for point-to-point as soon as vendors fix > security issues". > > http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog48/abstracts.php?pt=MTU1NCZuYW5vZzQ4&nm=nanog48 > > Greg > (works for Brocade) > > -- > Greg Hankins <[email protected]> > > -----Original Message----- > Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 13:43:36 +0200 > From: Youssef Bengelloun-Zahr <[email protected]> > To: Wouter Prins <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [f-nsp] Support for IPv6 127-bit subnet mask on point-to-point > networks > > Hello, > > This is indeed bad news as I am starting IPv6 deployment on our new > backbone :-/ > > I am not sure a /126 would be a better solution regarding the potential > security threats it raises. > > Maybe someone at Brocade is reading this thread and could give us a > feedback on this ? Greg ?!? > > Thanks. > > Y. > > > > 2012/8/27 Wouter Prins <[email protected]> > >> Hi Youssef, >> >> If you look at the release notes of 5.3.00b and look into defect >> DEFECT000391863 a /127 is unsupported on brocade. :( >> >> On 27 August 2012 11:44, Youssef Bengelloun-Zahr <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hello Community, >>> >>> Running MLXe boxes with 5.3.0b, I was wondering if /127 masks on p2p >>> interfaces were supported ? >>> >>> According to RFC6164, it should be : >>> ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc6164.txt >>> >>> I have found no mention of it in NetIron ConfGuide 5.3.0a. I will be >> testing >>> it anyway but wanted feedbacks for the community. >>> >>> More Specifically, is the first address Prefixe::0000/127 usable ? >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> Best. >>> >>> Y. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Youssef BENGELLOUN-ZAHR >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> foundry-nsp mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp >> >> >> >> -- >> Wouter Prins >> [email protected] >> > > > > -- > Youssef BENGELLOUN-ZAHR > > _______________________________________________ > foundry-nsp mailing list > [email protected] > http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp > _______________________________________________ > foundry-nsp mailing list > [email protected] > http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp _______________________________________________ foundry-nsp mailing list [email protected] http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp
