EWieling at nyigc.com
Mon Mar 24 19:04:54 UTC 2014
Yes, that is exactly what IPv6 expects of us. The only surprising part is by all indications the IPv6 designers did not think this would be a problem.
From: William Herrin [mailto:bill at herrin.us]
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 1:14 PM
To: Joe Greco
Cc: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: misunderstanding scale
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Joe Greco <jgreco at ns.sol.net> wrote:
>> all successful security is about _defense in depth_.
>> If it is inaccessible, unrouted, unroutable and unaddressable then
>> you have four layers of security. If it is merely inaccessible and
>> unrouted you have two.
> Time to give up two layers of meaningless security for the riches
> offered by the vastness of the new address space.
You'd expect folks to give up two layers of security at exactly the same time as they're absorbing a new network protocol with which they're yet unskilled? Does that make sense to you from a risk-management standpoint?
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
More information about the NANOG