On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 04:27:16PM -0500, Timothy Morizot wrote:
On Mar 23, 2014 11:27 AM, "Paul Ferguson" <fergdawgster@mykolab.com> wrote:
Also, IPv6 introduces some serious security concerns, and until they are properly addressed, they will be a serious barrier to even considering it.
And that is pure FUD. The sorts of security risks with IPv6 are mostly in the same sorts of categories as those with IPv4 and have appropriate mitigations available. Moreover, by not enabling and controlling IPv6 on their networks, an operator is actually markedly more vulnerable to IPv6 attacks, not less.
Scott
Yo, Tim/Scott. Seems you have not been keeping up. http://go6.si/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/DREN-6-Slo-IPv6Summit-2011.pdf points out several unique problems w/ IPv6 and in deployments where there are ZERO IPv4 equivalents. Ferg is paranoid, but it doesn;t mean they are not out to get him/IPv6. /bill