Re: IPv6 will never fly: ARIN continues to kill it

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> 
> >>> 	Except there really is no vendor lock anymore.  It is
> >>> 	possible to automate the entire renumbering process.  If
> >>> 	there are spots where it is not automated then they should
> >>> 	be found and fixed.
> >>>       
> >> Oh man, that's rich.  Do you actually believe that?
> >>     
> >
> > 	If you design the network for IPv6 and not just copy the
> > 	IPv4 model.  If you use the technology that has been developed
> > 	over the last 20 years, rather than disabling it, yes it is
> > 	possible.
> >   
> That helps, but understanding of IPv6 and mindshare is even harder than
> forklift upgrades.

	I'll agree that it is hard.  That's why the clue x 4 keeps having
	to be applied.

> And you have to educate everyone who might need to configure an application,
> not just network admins.

	The network admins are a early step.

> And if you start
> looking for technology that would let you automate renumbering your
> entire network, you might find that the technology that exists is
> incomplete and unproven.

	Which is why I keep saying.  Run through the renumbering exercise.
	Find the problems.  Report them to your vendors.  Vendors being
	proactive would be a big help here.

> I have yet to see a reliable, standard way to
> transmit address-based access-control information to applications, for
> instance.  (don't tell them to use DNS, because besides being too
> unreliable to use for this, I am not aware of a DNS record that can
> transmit a list of IP address prefix/netmask pairs to applications,

	It exists.

> or of a standard API that would allow applications to find such
> information.

	They also exist.

> oh yes, and practical use of DNS security still seems to
> elude us.

	It will as long as people don't actually sign there zones.
	Have you asked for cs.utk.edu to be signed?

% dig dnskey cs.utk.edu

; <<>> DiG 9.3.4-P1 <<>> dnskey cs.utk.edu
;; global options:  printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 46982
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;cs.utk.edu.                    IN      DNSKEY

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
cs.utk.edu.             900     IN      SOA     dns01.cs.utk.edu. miturria.cs.utk.edu. 2007090900 10800 1800 604800 900

;; Query time: 387 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
;; WHEN: Fri Sep 14 00:46:21 2007
;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 79

% 

>  and yeah, we shouldn't be using IP addresses for access
> control - but the general purpose technology to replace that doesn't
> seem to exist yet, so for the time being people are making do with what
> they have.)
> 
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]