Yes, that is exactly what IPv6 expects of us. The only surprising part is by all indications the IPv6 designers did not think this would be a problem.
-----Original Message----- From: William Herrin [mailto:b...@herrin.us] Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 1:14 PM To: Joe Greco Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: misunderstanding scale On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Joe Greco <jgr...@ns.sol.net> wrote: >> all successful security is about _defense in depth_. >> If it is inaccessible, unrouted, unroutable and unaddressable then >> you have four layers of security. If it is merely inaccessible and >> unrouted you have two. > > Time to give up two layers of meaningless security for the riches > offered by the vastness of the new address space. Hi Joe, You'd expect folks to give up two layers of security at exactly the same time as they're absorbing a new network protocol with which they're yet unskilled? Does that make sense to you from a risk-management standpoint? -Bill -- William D. Herrin ................ her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
