Re: Should jail treat ip-number?

Ollivier Robert (robertokeltia.freenix.fr)
Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:00:04 +0100

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Next message: Larry Sica: "Re: Port 137 hitting my server"
• Previous message: Scott I. Remick: "Re: Port 1243 scans"
• In reply to: HTS: "Re: Port 1243 scans"
• Next in thread: sthaugnethelp.no: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"

According to Poul-Henning Kamp:
> I personally do not see IPv6 as being desirable at this time.

I see it as very desirable now for several reasons besides the usual ones
(shortage of address space, explosion of routing tables):

- it provides true mobility (still in the works I know),
- the larger address space enables one to avoid the NAT abomination,
- security is mandatory (even if many people don't wand the overhead),
- autoconfiguration is really great

> Ohh, OSI was quite a live for a long time as well, until the government
> funded life-support was cut, then it evaporated overnight.

OSI is still present in two major areas: telecom systems (GSM, supervision of
the same) and Aeronautical systems (Air Traffic Management / Control). I work
in the latter and we're pushing IPv6 as much as we can.

-- 
Ollivier ROBERT -=- FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! -=- robertokeltia.freenix.fr
FreeBSD keltia.freenix.fr 4.0-CURRENT #75: Tue Nov  2 21:03:12 CET 1999
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomoFreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message

• Next message: Larry Sica: "Re: Port 137 hitting my server"
• Previous message: Scott I. Remick: "Re: Port 1243 scans"
• In reply to: HTS: "Re: Port 1243 scans"
• Next in thread: sthaugnethelp.no: "Re: Should jail treat ip-number?"

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue Nov 09 1999 - 17:11:04 CST