On Dec 17, 2007 9:59 PM, Paul Ferguson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> - -- "Steven M. Bellovin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [re: v6 mythos]
>
> >In a slightly more realistic vein, a huge address space makes life
> >harder for scanning worms. As
On Dec 17, 2007, at 9:58 PM, Danny McPherson wrote:
when client-side attacks seem to be more than sufficient.
A self-selected group of victims really helps lower the
reconnaissance opex, heh.
;>
---
Roland Dobbins <[EMA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -- "Steven M. Bellovin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[re: v6 mythos]
>In a slightly more realistic vein, a huge address space makes life
>harder for scanning worms. As Angelos Keromytis, Bill Cheswick, and I
>have pointed out, "harder" is by no mea
On Dec 17, 2007, at 10:37 PM, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:29:21 -0800
"Christopher Morrow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
how does it improve data security exactly?
Back in 1994, it was expected to be true because v6 would mandate
IPsec, and v6 would be deployed long befo
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:29:21 -0800
"Christopher Morrow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> how does it improve data security exactly?
>
Back in 1994, it was expected to be true because v6 would mandate
IPsec, and v6 would be deployed long before the installed base of v4
machines would be upgraded to I
Apparently, from what I have gathered from other french people, Free has
rolled out a variation of 6to4 using their own prefix instead of the well
known 2002::/16. As they control their home gateway, this was fairly easy
for them to do and did not require much core infrastructure change. The
appar
> " Furthermore, IPv6 simplifies the configuration of devices when connected to
> the Internet. It improves data security and supports quality of services."
> how does it improve data security exactly?
attackers are daunted by the smoke and mirrors?
this stuff is hard enough to roll without the
On Dec 17, 2007 10:29 AM, Sean Siler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks to all for your private replies - I have the answer now.
>
> (It appears to be Free.fr, if you are interested.)
>
> http://www.iliad.fr/en/presse/2007/CP_IPv6_121207_eng.pdf
I'm glad they managed to get in all the hype for
Cogent's again seeing congestion at their hand-off to ATDN.net.
Traceroutes to their mailservers show packet loss and mail into AOL is
dying a few packets into the conversation.
Cogent says they're "waiting on a call back" from AOL, no ETR provided.
Carl Hirsch
I'm looking to do some custom monitoring of a system and the contracted NOC
only supports pings, SNMP queries, and SNMP traps. My first choice was to
send an e-mail and have their system ingest it, but that's not possible, and
the first two aren't an option, which means I'm looking to send them S
Thanks to all for your private replies - I have the answer now.
(It appears to be Free.fr, if you are interested.)
http://www.iliad.fr/en/presse/2007/CP_IPv6_121207_eng.pdf
Sean
Sean Siler|IPv6 Program Manager
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
On 2007/12/17 10:01, Sean Siler wrote:
> Does anyone know which ISP the poster is talking about? Is there any truth to
> this at all?
http://www.iliad.fr/presse/2007/CP_IPv6_121207.pdf
In a recent Slashdot article
(http://slashdot.org/articles/07/12/17/1451230.shtml) discussing IPv6, someone
left a comment the read, in part "One of the largest IPSs (sic) in Europe
turned on IPv6 to all 8 million users this week. They've done the right thing
and made it opt-in for now, their
13 matches
Mail list logo