Time to stopy saying there is no IPv6 traffice: was Re: ddos attacks

cb.list6 cb.list6 at gmail.com
Thu Dec 19 07:27:56 UTC 2013


On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Jon Lewis <jlewis at lewis.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
>
>  On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:12:28 -0800, "cb.list6" said:
>>
>>  I am strongly considering having my upstreams to simply rate limit ipv4
>>> UDP. It is the simplest solution that is proactive.
>>>
>>
>> What are the prospects for ipv6 UDP not suffering the same fate?
>>
>
> Roughly 0%, but there's so little v6 traffic compared to v4, you probably
> don't have to worry about v6 attack traffic yet...particularly if you're
> not dual stack yet.  :)
>
>
I understand that your answer about nil IPv6 traffic may be appropriate for
your network, but for many of us IPv6 is currently a non-trivial amount of
traffic that is growing quickly.  And, in some cases, IPv6 is the dominate
amount of traffic.  Here are some quick stats of a few select familiar
names from http://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/

Google Fiber 70%
Virginia Tech 61%
Verizon Wireless 40%
Comcast 20%
AT&T Wireline 15%
T-Mobile US 6%




> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Jon Lewis, MCP :)           |  I route
>                              |  therefore you are
> _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
>


More information about the NANOG mailing list