nanog mailing list archives
Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?
From: Bill Stewart <nonobvious () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 08:22:47 -0700
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
Here's an exercise. Wipe a PC. Put it on that cable modem with no firewall. Install XP on it. See if you can get any service packs installed before the box is infected.1. Yes, I can. I simply didn't put an IPv4 address on it. ;-) 2. I wouldn't hold XP up as the gold standard of hosts here.
One of my coworkers was IPv6ing his home network. He had to turn off the Windows firewall on the machine with the IPv6 tunnel for a couple of minutes to install some stubborn software. Then he had to reimage the box because it was pwned, and he's pretty sure that the infection came in over the IPv6 tunnel, not the hardware-firewalled IPv4. -- ---- Thanks; Bill Note that this isn't my regular email account - It's still experimental so far. And Google probably logs and indexes everything you send it.
Current thread:
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?, (continued)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Andy Davidson (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Matthew Kaufman (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Nick Hilliard (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Valdis . Kletnieks (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Jon Lewis (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Valdis . Kletnieks (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Jon Lewis (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Valdis . Kletnieks (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Jon Lewis (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Owen DeLong (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Bill Stewart (Apr 29)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Mark Smith (Apr 30)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? James Hess (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Matthew Kaufman (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Adrian Chadd (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Mark Andrews (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Owen DeLong (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Matthew Kaufman (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Owen DeLong (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? Matthew Kaufman (Apr 27)
- Re: the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? John R. Levine (Apr 27)