Request to participate in 2-min study survey on IPv6 Adoption

Mon Jan 31 11:21:22 UTC 2022

That's just plain as* bullsh** right there.

-- 
 J. Hellenthal

The fact that there's a highway to Hell but only a stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.

> On Jan 30, 2022, at 19:09, Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Peace,
> 
>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2022, 4:38 PM Smahena Amakran <smahenamakran at gmail.com> wrote:
>> For my studies, I am researching IPv6 adoption.
> 
> 
> For your consideration, there's one thing that's always overlooked.
> 
> E.g. I've been talking once to a big employee of a large content provider, and that person told me they don't enable IPv6 because doing otherwise produces tons of comment spam.
> 
> The thing is, we have this spam problem. This is not really the "information security issue" you've mentioned, this is just a glimpse of a real issue.
> 
> IPv6 is now cheap as chips. It's very dirty therefore. All kinds of bots, spammers, password brute force programs live in there, and it's significantly harder to correlate and ditch these with the sparse IPv6 address space.
> 
> ISPs don't typically focus on these kinds of things but ISPs, speaking of large ones, are also typically champions in IPv6 deployment.  It's usually content providers who don't do their stuff.  And, as sad as it gets, it's not getting away any time soon since it's there for a reason.
> 
> --
> Töma
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20220131/433c26db/attachment.html>