nanog mailing list archives
Re: NIST IPv6 document
From: Seth Mattinen <sethm () rollernet us>
Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 10:23:28 -0800
On 1/5/2011 10:02, TJ wrote:
Many would argue that the version of IP is irrelevant, if you are permitting external hosts the ability to scan your internal network in an unrestricted fashion (no stateful filtering or rate limiting) you have already lost, you just might not know it yet.
Stateful filtering introduces its own set of scaling issues. ~Seth
Current thread:
- Re: NIST IPv6 document, (continued)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Mark Smith (Jan 06)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Owen DeLong (Jan 06)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Phil Regnauld (Jan 06)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Jack Bates (Jan 05)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Richard Barnes (Jan 05)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document TJ (Jan 05)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Jeff Wheeler (Jan 05)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Dobbins, Roland (Jan 05)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document TJ (Jan 06)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Jack Bates (Jan 06)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Seth Mattinen (Jan 05)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Dobbins, Roland (Jan 05)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document TJ (Jan 06)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Joe Greco (Jan 05)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Dobbins, Roland (Jan 05)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Joe Greco (Jan 05)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Dobbins, Roland (Jan 05)
- RE: NIST IPv6 document George Bonser (Jan 05)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Dobbins, Roland (Jan 05)
- RE: NIST IPv6 document George Bonser (Jan 05)
- Re: NIST IPv6 document Dobbins, Roland (Jan 05)