nanog mailing list archives

Re: NIST IPv6 document


From: TJ <trejrco () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 15:17:07 -0500

On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 13:14, Jeff Wheeler <jsw () inconcepts biz> wrote:

On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:02 PM, TJ <trejrco () gmail com> 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

How do you propose to rate-limit this scanning traffic?  More router
knobs are needed.  This also does not solve problems with malicious
hosts on the LAN.


Off the top of my head, maybe just slow down the generation of new NS
attempts when under attack (without impacting the NUD-based NS).




A stateful firewall on every router interface has been suggested
already on this thread.  It is unrealistic.

Even granting that, for the sake of argument - it seems like it would not
be
hard for $vendor to have some sort of "emergency garbage collection"
routines within their NDP implementations ... ?

How do you propose the router know what entries are "garbage" and
which are needed?  Eliminating active, "good" entries to allow for
more churn would make the problem much worse, not better.


Again, off the top of my head, maybe - when under duress - age out the
incomplete ND table entries faster.


/TJ


Current thread: