Re: A new transition plan, was: Re: the evilness of NAT-PT, was: chicago IETF IPv6 connectivity

[Mark Andrews <Mark_Andrews at isc.org>]

> On 6-jul-2007, at 20:53, Douglas Otis wrote:
> 
> > How will SMTP servers vet sources of inbound messages within an  
> > IPv6 environment?  Virtually every grain of sand can obtain a "new"  
> > IPv6 address.
> 
> Simple: look at prefixes rather than individual addresses. If  
> 2002::2002 is a spammer, then you may want to assume that 2002::2003,  
> 2002::2004 etc are also spammers. With IPv6, the "CIDR distance"  
> between nodes under different administration should be considerably  
> larger than with IPv4, where you'll often see systems belonging to  
> different people on consecutive addresses.

	You will still see consective addresses with IPv6.  Until
	you put a *dedicated* router at the end of the DSL line or
	on the cable modem etc.  there will still be lots of addresses
	handed out where the next address is managed by someone
	else.
 
> > An IPv6 address may traverse any number of translation points as well.
> 
> Huh? What are you talking about?
> 
> > This complex topology spells the end of SMTP in its current form.
> 
> And that's a bad thing? It's the fundamental lack of, well,  
> everything, in SMTP that allows all this spam that we're suffering  
> from these days and makes it impossible to get rid of things like the  
> base64 encoding overhead.
> 
> Build a better mousetrap rather than complain that the mice don't  
> like the cheese.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews at isc.org

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf