[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP

To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
Subject: Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
From: itojun@itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino)
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 03:08:31 +0900 (JST)
Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, 69attendees@ietf.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 24 Jul 2007 12:45:10 -0500" <C2CBA4D6.1A3A4E%jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
References: <C2CBA4D6.1A3A4E%jordi.palet@consulintel.es>

	now i see rogue RAs which advertise fec0:0:0:4::/64 and
	202:8281:1768:4::/64.  my guess is that this is from the same guy.

	we need L2 switch vendors to implement ways to prevent rogue RA/DHCPv6
	sources, just like ways to avoiding rogue DHCPv4 servers/relay agents.

itojun

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
  - From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>

References:
- Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
  - From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>

Prev by Date: Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
Next by Date: Re: Tagging traffic (Was: CPE equipments and stateful filters)
Previous by thread: Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
Next by thread: Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread