nanog mailing list archives
Re: misunderstanding scale
From: "John Levine" <johnl () iecc com>
Date: 26 Mar 2014 17:10:10 -0000
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.
Sigh. See previous note on wny aggregating on /64 won't work.
This would also reduce the risks from cache depletion attacks via DNSxL lookups to IPv4 levels.
Sigh. See previous note on wny aggregating on /64 won't work. R's, John
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 Owen DeLong (Mar 29)
- Re: why IPv6 isn't ready for prime time, SMTP edition Barry Shein (Mar 30)
- 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)