On Sunday, March 23, 2014 09:35:31 PM Denis Fondras wrote:
When speaking of IPv6 deployment, I routinely hear about host security. I feel like it should be stated that this is *in no way* an IPv6 issue. May the device be ULA, LLA, GUA or RFC1918-addressed, the device is at risk anyway.
If this is the only argument for delaying IPv6 deployment, this sounds more like FUD to me ;-)
I guess it's no surprise that host security is not an IPv4 or IPv6 issue. It's just that with IPv4, the majority of unclean and unupdated hosts have been living behind NAT44. In an ideal IPv6 world, all hosts have GUA's, and in this case, host security becomes a bigger problem, because now the host is directly accessible without a NAT66 in between (we hope). Mark.