[ipv6hackers] Is there a telecom company which adpated IPv6 network on LTE?

[Owen DeLong]

Sent from my iPad

On May 30, 2013, at 11:20 AM, "cb.list6" <cb.list6 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Owen DeLong <owend at he.net> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>> On May 30, 2013, at 2:57 AM, 김무성 <disaster at sk.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Owen, what is your smartphone provider(ISP or telecom company)?
>> 
>> VZW
> 
> T-Mobile USA also allows inbound IPv6 connections.  Perhaps
> "end-to-end IPv6 connectivity"  is now a de facto standard, ask for it
> by name :)

True, but Skype still works on VZW.

> 
> 
> CB
>>> 
>>> And, I think that push service is inbound traffic (internet -> smartphone)
>>> If block any inbound traffic, we can use push service.
>>> If smartphone has a public IPv6 address, because of attacker, because of inbound traffic, there is a incorrect billing.
>> 
>> So far, I have not seen a problem.
>> 
>>> 
>>> How do you think about this?
>> 
>> I suppose it's a potential issue, but is this different from any other metered internet service which allows inbound traffic?
>> 
>> Owen
>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ipv6hackers-bounces at lists.si6networks.com [mailto:ipv6hackers-bounces at lists.si6networks.com] On Behalf Of cb.list6
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 9:37 AM
>>> To: IPv6 Hackers Mailing List
>>> Subject: Re: [ipv6hackers] Is there a telecom company which adpated IPv6 network on LTE?
>>> 
>>> On May 29, 2013 10:18 AM, "Owen DeLong" <owend at he.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> My smart phone is working perfectly fine with public IPv6 /64. So far,
>>>> it
>>> does not appear to be a security problem.
>>>> 
>>>> I receive a /64. My IPv4 is NAT sometimes and sometimes public
>>>> (depends
>>> where I am located).
>>>> 
>>>> I think the security issues are the same whether or not NAT.
>>>> 
>>>> Owen
>>> 
>>> My guess is that your mobile operator does stateful firewalling that disables any inbound connections, is that right?
>>> 
>>> If so, any idea on how many state entries they allow you to create in their firewall for outbound flows?
>>> 
>>> CB
>>> 
>>>> On May 28, 2013, at 23:27 , 김무성 <disaster at sk.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> One of advantage which deploy ipv6 network on telecom is that all
>>> smart-phone can have a public IPv6 address.
>>>>> But it cause security problem that hacker can attack smart-phone
>>> directly.
>>>>> If deploy a NAT6/6 or NAT6/4 device for security, availability of
>>>>> ipv6
>>> is low
>>>>> And have to have ALG (Application Layer Gateway) device for
>>>>> providing
>>> service. (ex, SIP ALG for VoIP on LTE, etc)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Is there a solution that use public IPv6 address on smart-phone and
>>> strengthen security?
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Ipv6hackers mailing list
>>>>> Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com
>>>>> http://lists.si6networks.com/listinfo/ipv6hackers
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ipv6hackers mailing list
>>>> Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com
>>>> http://lists.si6networks.com/listinfo/ipv6hackers
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ipv6hackers mailing list
>>> Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com
>>> http://lists.si6networks.com/listinfo/ipv6hackers
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ipv6hackers mailing list
>>> Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com
>>> http://lists.si6networks.com/listinfo/ipv6hackers
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ipv6hackers mailing list
>> Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com
>> http://lists.si6networks.com/listinfo/ipv6hackers
> _______________________________________________
> Ipv6hackers mailing list
> Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com
> http://lists.si6networks.com/listinfo/ipv6hackers