[ipv6hackers] my IPv6 insecurity slides
marco.ermini at gmail.com
Fri Dec 16 12:38:04 CET 2011
On 24 November 2011 20:45, Markus Reschke wrote:
> That situation will not last very long! We'll see more and more IPv6-only
> networks, since all IPv4 addresses will be assigned soon. Users will
> complain that they can't reach the webshop or B2B site of a new company. So
> nearly any network is forced to support IPv6 sooner or later.
As long as vendors continue to make huge money with Carrier Grade's
6-4 NAT, no, I don't necessarily agree.
> As I wrote above: connectivity is more important than security (for users)!
> IPv6 won't be an option, it's becoming a requirement. It's not our decision
> because the market is heading to IPv6. We may advise how to improve security
> but nothing more.
Users do not care how they are connected. If an ISP is able to make
them reach IPv6-only sites (are there any relevant out there up to
now? I don't believe so) without changing their home router (which is
a major cost for the ISP), they won't have any big interest in that.
> So any discussions about deploying IPv6 or not are futile IMHO.
Indeed they are not, but should be put in the right prospective.
root at human # mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research
"Jesus saves... but Buddha makes incremental back-ups!"
More information about the Ipv6hackers