V6 still not supported

Mon Apr 4 16:22:31 UTC 2022

On Mon, Apr 04, 2022 at 04:24:49PM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote:
> Related to the LEA agencies and CGN:
> 
> https://www.europol.europa.eu/media-press/newsroom/news/are-you-sharing-same-ip-address-criminal-law-enforcement-call-for-end-of-carrier-grade-nat-cgn-to-increase-accountability-online

And how is this really horribly different than all the Napster crap
where the "owner" of an ISP account got blamed for the activities of
a family member or guest?

Maybe the LEA agencies need some better clue.  I'm fine with them
advocating for IPv6, but I have a suspicion that IPv6 is just another
can of worms, because when you have "an IPv4 internets worth of
internets" (64 bits) available as the host portion of an IPv6 address,
and stuff like RFC 4941, they're going to continue to mistarget the
account owner even in the absence of CG-NAT.

Finding a law enforcement compatible method of who generated traffic
currently ends up being an exercise in keeping detailed logs.  Which
could be done with CG-NAT.  Which makes the referenced article an
example of a failure to understand the true (and horrifying) nature
of the problem of traffic attribution.

Doesn't even begin to touch on pwnage issues.

... JG
-- 
Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net
"The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way
through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that
democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'"-Asimov