On Tue, 2012-03-13 at 22:45 +1030, Glen Turner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am the network engineer at Australia's Academic and Research Network
> responsible for assisting the deployment of IPv6 across Australian
> universities. Your posting was bought to my attention.
>
> Your phrasing of the condition f
Hi,
I am the network engineer at Australia's Academic and Research Network
responsible for assisting the deployment of IPv6 across Australian
universities. Your posting was bought to my attention.
Your phrasing of the condition for blocking is pretty broad: there are
lots of ways to break IPv6, j
* Dan Williams
> On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 09:59 -0600, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
>> This may be the case for the network that you or I run, but not for
>> providers. Comcast require DHCPv6 (otherwise they can't delegate
>> /64 automatically).
>
> Do they send RAs at all? If so, which (if either) of the "
* Thomas Woerner
> For now DHCPv6-client support is enabled in 'work' and 'home', but
> not in the default zone 'public'.
>
> Should we enable dhcpv6-client in the default zone and maybe others
> also?
Hi Thomas,
In my humble opinion...
Considering that the DHCPv6 protocol is almost an exact I
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 13:08:24 -0500
Dan Williams wrote:
> > Comcast require DHCPv6 (otherwise they can't delegate /64 automatically).
>
> Do they send RAs at all? If so, which (if either) of the "other" and
> "managed" flags are set? If they don't, do they just expect DHCPv6 to
> be magically r
On Sat, 2012-03-10 at 15:31 +0100, Tore Anderson wrote:
> * Adam Williamson
>
> > At the meeting, we made the call that IPv6-only networks are becoming
> > a configuration sufficiently important that a serious breach of the
> > criteria in the context of an IPv6-only network is significant enough
On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 09:59 -0600, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 07:46:56 -0600
> Chris Adams wrote:
>
> > DHCPv6 is not the only way to configure dynamic IPv6; my home network is
> > using SLAAC. IMHO that will probably be more common in home and other
> > small networks.
>
> This
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 07:46:56 -0600
Chris Adams wrote:
> DHCPv6 is not the only way to configure dynamic IPv6; my home network is
> using SLAAC. IMHO that will probably be more common in home and other
> small networks.
This may be the case for the network that you or I run, but not for provider
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, Jiri Popelka wrote:
On 03/12/2012 01:41 PM, Thomas Woerner wrote:
With zone support in firewalld I'd like to start a discussion on the zones
that should enable DHCPv6 client support.
For now DHCPv6-client support is enabled in 'work' and 'home', but not in
the default zo
On 03/12/2012 01:41 PM, Thomas Woerner wrote:
With zone support in firewalld I'd like to start a discussion on the
zones that should enable DHCPv6 client support.
For now DHCPv6-client support is enabled in 'work' and 'home', but not
in the default zone 'public'.
Should we enable dhcpv6-clie
On 03/10/2012 03:31 PM, Tore Anderson wrote:
Regarding this bug in particular, I'll just note that it there is
already a precedent. In a default Fedora installation, traffic to the
DHCPv4 client (which is the same binary as the DHCPv6 client) is allowed
from the entire internet. From a security
* Chris Adams
> Once upon a time, Ralf Ertzinger said:
>> SLAAC will not give you DNS servers.
>
> The RAs can (and do on my home network) include DNS servers and search
> prefixes.
You're both right, in a way. IPv6 addressing can come from either RAs
(SLAAC), DHCPv6, or both; IPv6 DNS servers
* Adam Williamson
> At the meeting, we made the call that IPv6-only networks are becoming
> a configuration sufficiently important that a serious breach of the
> criteria in the context of an IPv6-only network is significant enough
> to be considered a release blocker, and we accepted the bug as
Once upon a time, Ralf Ertzinger said:
> SLAAC will not give you DNS servers.
The RAs can (and do on my home network) include DNS servers and search
prefixes.
--
Chris Adams
Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services
I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough troubl
Hi.
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 07:46:56 -0600, Chris Adams wrote
> DHCPv6 is not the only way to configure dynamic IPv6; my home network
> is using SLAAC. IMHO that will probably be more common in home and
> other small networks. The only thing I'd be missing for v6-only
> would be the ability to set
Once upon a time, Adam Williamson said:
> To be more precise...DHCPv6 is blocked. So I guess if you used a static
> network config it would work.
DHCPv6 is not the only way to configure dynamic IPv6; my home network is
using SLAAC. IMHO that will probably be more common in home and other
small n
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 20:54 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Hey, folks. We made a fairly significant call at the blocker review
> > meeting today, and agreed to notify devel list and FESCo (I'll file a
> > FESCo ticket also) so everyone's
On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 20:54 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
> Hey, folks. We made a fairly significant call at the blocker review
> meeting today, and agreed to notify devel list and FESCo (I'll file a
> FESCo ticket also) so everyone's aware and can raise objections if they
> wish.
>
> The bug unde
18 matches
Mail list logo
