nanog mailing list archives
Re: misunderstanding scale
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 22:17:18 -0700
On Mar 26, 2014, at 3:18 AM, Matthias Leisi <matthias () leisi net> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 6:31 AM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:OTOH, a spammer with a single /64, pretty much the absolute minimum IPv6 block, has more than 18 quintillion addresses and there's not a computer on the planet with enough memory (or probably not even enough disk space) to store that block list.It only takes a single entry if you do not store /128s but that /64. Yes, RBL lookups do not currently know how to handle this, but there are a couple of good proposals around on how to do it.
Then the spammers will grab /48s instead of /64s. Lather, rinse, repeat. Admittedly, /48s are only 65,536 RBL entries per, but I still think that address-based reputations are a losing battle in an IPv6 world unless we provide some way for providers to hint at block sizes. After all, if you start blocking a /64, what if it’s a /64 shared by thousands of hosting customers at one provider offering virtuals?
This would also reduce the risks from cache depletion attacks via DNSxL lookups to IPv4 levels.
Yes and no.
Sometimes scale is everything. host-based reputation lists scale easily to3.2 billion host addresses. IPv6, not so easily.As soon as we get away from host-centric-view to a network-block-view, things get pretty straightforward.
Except where they don’t. Owen
Current thread:
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition, (continued)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Jimmy Hess (Mar 29)
- Message not available
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Larry Sheldon (Mar 29)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Barry Shein (Mar 29)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition John Levine (Mar 29)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition hammani . b (Mar 30)
- RE: misunderstanding scale Naslund, Steve (Mar 25)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Owen DeLong (Mar 25)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Matthias Leisi (Mar 26)
- Re: misunderstanding scale John Levine (Mar 26)
- RE: misunderstanding scale Naslund, Steve (Mar 26)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Owen DeLong (Mar 26)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Matthias Leisi (Mar 27)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Chip Marshall (Mar 27)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Barry Shein (Mar 27)
- Re: misunderstanding scale, SMTP edition John Levine (Mar 26)
- Re: misunderstanding scale, SMTP edition Jack Bates (Mar 26)
- Re: misunderstanding scale, SMTP edition Lamar Owen (Mar 26)
- Re: misunderstanding scale, SMTP edition Tony Finch (Mar 26)
- Re: misunderstanding scale (was: Ipv4 end, its fake.) Saku Ytti (Mar 23)
- Re: misunderstanding scale (was: Ipv4 end, its fake.) Mark Tinka (Mar 23)
- Re: misunderstanding scale (was: Ipv4 end, its fake.) Mark Andrews (Mar 23)