The "nanog problem" was clearly stated. It had nothing to do with the specific discussion, but more that the discussion contained instances where folks were being insulting and crude. Tim Rainier Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Sent by: owner-nanog@merit.edu 08/02/2005 03:39 PM To "Chris Ranch" <CRanch@Affinity.com> cc Bjørn Mork <bjorn@mork.no>, "Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow@mci.com>, <nanog@merit.edu> Subject RE: "Cisco gate" and "Meet the Fed" at Defcon....
But the vulnerability applies for only ipv6-enabled devices... http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa-20050729-ipv6.shtml
the general problem is definitely wider than the v6 hole. i believe, but of course could be wrong, that the april fix was a bit wider than v6. the blackhat/nanog problem is that, if we are not allowed to discuss these things openly, all is conjecturbation. randy