[arin-ppml] Defcon speaker calls IPv6 a 'security nightmare'

[Scott Leibrand]

Roger,

Could you try to focus on the address policy implications (if any) of 
stuff like this?

As far as I can tell, most of your arguments would support 
standardization of some sort of IPv6 NAT, but that's out of scope for 
ARIN, and IMO would be better discussed on the appropriate IETF list.  
I'm sure there are some policy implications of all this, but I'm having 
a hard time seeing them amid all the debate.

Thanks,
Scott

On Mon 8/9/2010 11:16 AM, Roger Marquis wrote:
>> Getting back to the technical reasons for NAT, or at least trying to, 
>> are
>> there no takers for these questions?
>
> More unanswered questions for IPv6 nat-o-phobes:
>
> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/08/06/ipv6_security_nightmare/>
>
>  "It is extremely important for hackers to get in here fast because IPv6
>  is a security nightmare," Sam Bowne, an instructor  in the Computer
>  Networking and Information Technology Department at the City College of
>  San Francisco, said on day one of the Defcon hacker conference in Las
>  Vegas. "We're coming into a time of crisis and no one is ready."
>
> Roger Marquis
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.