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

Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP

To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, 69attendees@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:30:38 +0100
In-reply-to: <20070724180831.C092E233CB@coconut.itojun.org>
Mail-followup-to: v6ops@ops.ietf.org, 69attendees@ietf.org
References: <C2CBA4D6.1A3A4E%jordi.palet@consulintel.es> <20070724180831.C092E233CB@coconut.itojun.org>
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i

On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 03:08:31AM +0900, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> 	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.

Any comments on

http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07jul/slides/dhc-5.pdf

to the v6ops list would be welcome.   A couple of us will be converting
this material, which was assembled from talking to various admin type
people from enterprise networks, into an informational draft in the next 
couple of weeks.   The draft will include feedback received from dhc and 
v6ops WG meetings yesterday, and hopefully generate some discussion
towards 'bcp' type advice.

-- 
Tim

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
  - From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
- Handling rogue RA feedback
  - From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>

References:
- Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
  - From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
- Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
  - From: itojun@itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino)

Prev by Date: Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
Next by Date: Re: CPE equipments and stateful filters
Previous by thread: Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
Next by thread: Handling rogue RA feedback
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread