IPv6 Pain Experiment

Mon Oct 7 13:31:19 UTC 2019

On 10/7/19 4:37 AM, Valdis Klētnieks wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Oct 2019 03:03:45 -0400, Rob McEwen said:
>> Likewise for spam filtering - spam filtering would be knocked back to
>> the stone ages if IPv4 disappeared overnight. IPv6 is a spam sender's
>> dream come true, since IPv6 DNSBLs are practically worthless.
> 
> Riddle me this:  Why then have spammers not abandoned IPv4 and moved to
> IPv6 where we're totally powerless to stop their floods of spam?
> 
> I'm tired of hearing the excuse "We can't move to IPv6 because then we couldn't
> stop the spam" - if that were true, then every organization that *has* moved
> to IPv6 would be drowning in spam.

Spammers haven't abandoned IPv4 for IPv6 because some significant
percentage of mail servers are still IPv4 only.  I know mine is, and
will most likely stay that way for the reasons that Rob points out.  Any
link between an IPv6 spammer and an IPv4 mail server would have to
undergo NAT of some form, and the IPv4 address of NAT would then be
subject to blocking action.

The BOFH model from the old NFS days won't work anymore.