On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 7:31 AM, Crist J. Clark wrote:
> We're working out our dual stacked IPv4-IPv6 network. One
> issue that recently has arisen is how to number the management
> interfaces on the network devices themselves.
>
> I have always been kind of partial to the idea of taking advantage
Eugeniu Patrascu wrote:
> You can say it's a IPv4 thinking model, but it's easier to remember
> that if the fileserver it's at 192.168.10.10 then it's IPv6
> counterpart address would be 2001:abcd::192:168:10:10 (each subnet
> being a /64)
That is a clever idea except that it can not always follo
Though 2001:abcd::192:168:10:10 was written in a format with both :
and . , I think would could take the concept mentioned above and
extend it either by making it
2001:abcd::C0:A8:0A:0A
or
2001:abcd::C0A8:0A0A
Doing the latter wastes less space and let's the host use the upper
32bits of the host p
On 01/11/2012 12:20, Masataka Ohta wrote:
> We should better introduce partially decimal format for
> IPv6 addresses or, better, avoid IPv6 entirely.
No we shouldn't. Text representations of IPv6 addresses are already a
complete pain to parse. We don't need to add to this pain by adding a new
fo
In article
you
write:
>For simplicity and a wish to keep a mapping to our IPv4 addresses,
>each device (router/server/firewall) has a static IPv6 address that
>has the same last digits as the IPv4 address, only the subnet is
>changed.
>You can say it's a IPv4 thinking model, but it's easier to r
On Nov 1, 2012, at 06:06 , Nick Hilliard wrote:
> On 01/11/2012 12:20, Masataka Ohta wrote:
>> We should better introduce partially decimal format for
>> IPv6 addresses or, better, avoid IPv6 entirely.
>
> No we shouldn't. Text representations of IPv6 addresses are already a
> complete pain to
Hi Owen,
> You really shouldn't need to parse these and it's perfectly valid to reject
> them as invalid input. This really is an output only format [...]
I don't agree. I think it's actually the other way around. It's a valid
representation of an IPv6 address so you be able to parse them. You
Looks to have started at almost exactly 8am Eastern, though in our
case it's mostly west coast traffic(dst to comcast retail customers),
so seems unlikely to be aftermath of storm damage, unless someone
didn't look very closely at their traffic before noodling things.
Still, coming up on 3 hours my
An outage in the Bay Area is being worked at present Ray. -ren
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Ray Wong wrote:
> Looks to have started at almost exactly 8am Eastern, though in our
> case it's mostly west coast traffic(dst to comcast retail customers),
> so seems unlikely to be aftermath of storm
On 2012-11-01, at 10:27, Sander Steffann wrote:
>> You really shouldn't need to parse these and it's perfectly valid to reject
>> them as invalid input. This really is an output only format [...]
>
> I don't agree. I think it's actually the other way around. It's a valid
> representation of a
Somewhat.
I pay for 30/10.
I usually get about 70/30.
Currently I'm getting 33.5/7.42.
This is on Business Class.
Owen
On Nov 1, 2012, at 07:43 , Ray Wong wrote:
> Looks to have started at almost exactly 8am Eastern, though in our
> case it's mostly west coast traffic(dst to comcast retail
On 01-Nov-2012, Owen DeLong sent:
> The only exceptions to this parsing would be if someone handed
> you a textual representation of an IPv4 mapped address
> (:::192.0.2.50), which essentially represents the partial
> decimal format Masataka is requesting.
I might be missing something here, b
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 14:28:48 +0100, "Miquel van Smoorenburg" said:
> We use a /120 subnet for servers to prevent the NDP cache exhaustion
> attack. We do maintain a mapping between IPv4 and IPv6 addresses;
> it's simply 2001:db8:vv:ww::xx, where xx is the hex value of the
> last octet of the IPv4
On Nov 1, 2012, at 10:43 , Chip Marshall wrote:
> On 01-Nov-2012, Owen DeLong sent:
>> The only exceptions to this parsing would be if someone handed
>> you a textual representation of an IPv4 mapped address
>> (:::192.0.2.50), which essentially represents the partial
>> decimal format Masa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/1/2012 1:59 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 14:28:48 +0100, "Miquel van Smoorenburg" said:
>
>> We use a /120 subnet for servers to prevent the NDP cache
>> exhaustion attack. We do maintain a mapping between IPv4 and
There are better ways to avoid neighbor exhaustion attacks unless you have
attackers
inside your network.
If you have attackers inside your network, you probably have bigger problems
than
neighbor table attacks anyway, but that's a different issue.
Even if you're going to do something silly lik
A couple of thoughts:
1. The IOS specific parts of both Inside Cisco IOS Software Architecture
are still pretty relevant. The RIB is now a separate process, and there
are other changes, but the software architecture (of IOS specifically!)
is pretty close to what's there.
2. The hardware architec
In article you write:
>There are better ways to avoid neighbor exhaustion attacks unless you
>have attackers
>inside your network.
You mean filtering. I haven't tried it recently, but a while ago
I put an output filter on a Juniper router that allowed just
the lower /120 out of a /64 on an interf
On Thu, 2012-11-01 at 07:07 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> I agree with you that we shouldn't introduce partially decimal format,
but I
> don't see why you say IPv6 addresses are difficult to parse.
They are not simple to parse, but not particularly difficult either.
> 1.Tokenize (on : boundarie
>
> I have always been kind of partial to the idea of taking advantage
> IPv6 features and letting hosts set their own addresses with EUI-64
> interface numbers.
That's all fine and dandy until the NIC card is swapped out for a new one. It's
best to use fixed IPv6 addresses for services (and hav
On Nov 1, 2012, at 4:41 PM, "Miquel van Smoorenburg" wrote:
> In article you write:
>> There are better ways to avoid neighbor exhaustion attacks unless you
>> have attackers
>> inside your network.
>
> You mean filtering. I haven't tried it recently, but a while ago
> I put an output filter o
On Nov 1, 2012, at 4:52 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-11-01 at 07:07 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> I agree with you that we shouldn't introduce partially decimal format,
> but I
>> don't see why you say IPv6 addresses are difficult to parse.
>
> They are not simple to parse, but not partic
22 matches
Mail list logo
