[ipv6hackers] Looking for feedback on subjective top list of IPv6 security issues
jim.small at cdw.com
Sat Mar 9 00:06:15 CET 2013
> On Fri, 2013-03-08 at 15:17 +0000, Jim Small wrote:
> > > to provide access control in various parts of network for this)
> > Agreed - you better know 3484 cold.
> 6724 now.
This is a good point. However, has any vendor actually implemented this yet? Usually it takes years for the RFCs to make it to code so to speak. Do you know if the Linux kernel maintainers or any of the Linux/BSD distros have looked at this?
> With a few important changes like adding in ULA to the prefs
> and labels tables, depreferencing 6to4, limiting longest matching prefix
> comparisons to the actual prefix lengths, preferring temporary over
> non-temporary, and opening the way for automated updates to the prefs
> and label tables.
Well, opening is the right word. Hopefully this makes it to an RFC standard:
More information about the Ipv6hackers