Hi, Fernando, On Aug 18, 2015 20:39, "Fernando Gont" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, Spencer, > > Thanks so much for your feedback! Please find my comments in-line.... > > On 08/17/2015 05:26 AM, Spencer Dawkins wrote: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > COMMENT: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > I echo Barry's "nice document", and would support the changes he > > suggested. > > > > I did notice what I believe is a repeated "not" in "it is not not only > > the lowest-order byte". > > Yep. Will fix this. > > > > > In this text: > > > > 3.4.1. Remote IPv6 Network Scanners > > > > Many address scanning tools such as nmap [nmap2012] do not even > > support sweeping an IPv6 address range. > > ^ > > does this mean "sweeping an IPv6 address range in a remote IPv6 network"? > > Yes. > > > > I think that's implicit from the section title, but what nmap supports is > > clearer in the corresponding text in the next section: > > > > 3.4.2. Local IPv6 Network Scanners > > > > There are a variety of publicly-available local IPv6 network > > scanners: > > > > o Current versions of nmap [nmap2012] implement this functionality. > > This is a different feature: for local scans, you can just "ping" the > all-nodes link-local multicast address. But when scanning a remote > network, you can only target unicast addresses. And for remote address > scans, nmap does not support targeting specific IPv6 address ranges.
Right. That's what I wasn't getting from the text. Thanks, Spencer > Thanks! > > Best regards, > -- > Fernando Gont > SI6 Networks > e-mail: [email protected] > PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492 > > > >
_______________________________________________ OPSEC mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsec
