BCP38.info, RELATING: TWC (AS11351) blocking all NTP?

Mon Feb 3 08:32:15 UTC 2014

On Feb 3, 2014, at 3:24 PM, Michael DeMan <nanog at deman.com> wrote:

> I meant mostly that with IPv6 NAT goes away,

I don't know if this is true or not - and even if it is true, it's going to be a long, long time before the IPv4 Internet goes away (like, maybe, pretty much forever, heh).

> An NTPv5 solution that could be done with NTP services already, and would be more of a 'best practices of how this shit starts up and what it can do' and educating vendors to have reasonable behavior in the first place?

Yes, but that's many years away, and doesn't address legacy issues.

> And an NTPv6 solution/RFC/guideline that was similar, could help?

Again, many years away, and doesn't address legacy issues.

> I disagree that 'filtering' or 'blocking' any kind of IPv4 or IPv6 protocol to 'protect the end user' is the wrong way to go when compared to just having things work in a secure manner.

Yes, but since the latter part of this statement is unattainable in the foreseeable future, the idea is actually to protect *the rest of the Internet* from misconfigured CPE.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins at arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>

	  Luck is the residue of opportunity and design.

		       -- John Milton