Re: Something with filters

2014-08-28 Thread Jeroen Massar
On 2014-08-28 07:57, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote: Jen had presented some similar stats a year ago. https://ripe67.ripe.net/presentations/288-Jen_RIPE67.pdf These kind of issues have been demonstrated for as long as IPv6 has existed, and people have been complaining to their account managers

Re: Something with filters

2014-08-28 Thread Enno Rey
...@google.commailto:lore...@google.com Date: jeudi 28 ao?t 2014 07:46 To: Jeroen Massar jer...@massar.chmailto:jer...@massar.ch Cc: IPv6 Ops list ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.demailto:ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de Subject: Re: Something with filters On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Jeroen Massar jer

Re: Something with filters

2014-08-28 Thread Steinar H. Gunderson
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 04:31:22PM +0200, Enno Rey wrote: to be honest, as another security person, I'm not really sure about the benefit of uRPF in the IPv6 world, in some scenarios. imagine a single infected smartphone on LTE, generating connections with potentially 2^64 different source

Re: Something with filters

2014-08-28 Thread Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
Subject: Re: Something with filters On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Jeroen Massar jer...@massar.chmailto:jer...@massar.ch wrote: 9 2001:5a0:a00::2e (2001:5a0:a00::2e) 79.018 ms 79.910 ms 79.960 ms 10 :: (::) 101.893 ms 102.004 ms 103.574 ms 11 rar3.chicago-il.us.xo.nethttp://rar3

Re: Something with filters

2014-08-28 Thread Gert Doering
Hi, On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 04:31:22PM +0200, Enno Rey wrote: to be honest, as another security person, I'm not really sure about the benefit of uRPF in the IPv6 world, in some scenarios. imagine a single infected smartphone on LTE, generating connections with potentially 2^64 different

Re: Something with filters

2014-08-28 Thread Jared Mauch
On 8/28/14 10:56 AM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote: Hi Enno, Regarding a 3GPP phone, AFAIK, it receives a /64 so it is scalable and easy to enforce uRPF at the very first layer-3 routers. Same for a home CPE (with a very minor impact, uRPF has same performance as plain forwarding == same lookup

Something with filters

2014-08-27 Thread Jeroen Massar
I was doing some traceroutes to determine some weird claim of a transit (not shown in the below trace) being tier1 while another transit actually popped up in their network and then noticed this beauty: 9 2001:5a0:a00::2e (2001:5a0:a00::2e) 79.018 ms 79.910 ms 79.960 ms 10 :: (::) 101.893

Re: Something with filters

2014-08-27 Thread Jeroen Massar
On 2014-08-27 19:52, Jared Mauch wrote: On Aug 27, 2014, at 12:01 PM, Jeroen Massar jer...@massar.ch wrote: I was doing some traceroutes to determine some weird claim of a transit (not shown in the below trace) being tier1 while another transit actually popped up in their network and then

Re: Something with filters

2014-08-27 Thread Sander Steffann
Hi, Especially a check for a zero'd address is really not that hard; it is just crazyness that that is not checked for. If possible, please file this problem with your relevant technical contacts and account managers, as it is just nonsense that that packet is allowed to travel over the

Re: Something with filters

2014-08-27 Thread Lorenzo Colitti
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Jeroen Massar jer...@massar.ch wrote: 9 2001:5a0:a00::2e (2001:5a0:a00::2e) 79.018 ms 79.910 ms 79.960 ms 10 :: (::) 101.893 ms 102.004 ms 103.574 ms 11 rar3.chicago-il.us.xo.net (:::65.106.1.155) 104.732 ms Yeah baby, we can use the

Re: Something with filters

2014-08-27 Thread Tassos Chatzithomaoglou
Jen had presented some similar stats a year ago. https://ripe67.ripe.net/presentations/288-Jen_RIPE67.pdf -- Tassos Jeroen Massar wrote on 27/8/2014 19:01: I was doing some traceroutes to determine some weird claim of a transit (not shown in the below trace) being tier1 while another transit