Re:IPv6 Adoption
by technofiend on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @08:36AM
(#14855646)
Considering what's at stake if you accidentally make some part of your infrastructure routable it seems pretty reasonable corporate environments want to be very careful about IPV6 adoption. Personally I think they should still do it but if HSBC is in the news tomorrow after leaking customer details because of a routing woops there would be a lot of "they should have known better!" here and in the press. It's going to a take a long time for sensitive corporate environments to decide the rewards outweigh the risks.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
I think any enterprise that fails in this way has way bigger issues, and I would expect to have already been compromised. Every single enterprise should already have the firewall rules on their edge routers that would prevent that set up even with IPv4 (remember, NAT is not intended as a security feature and only kind-of works like one. Any competent network engineer should not be relying on NAT to add any security).
Re:IPv6 Adoption
by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC on Wednesday July 26, 2017 @09:29AM
(#14856014)
Infrastructure that is "unroutable" is not usable. Whether you add a route from the outside world to your internal services is completely orthogonal to whether your protocol is IPv4 or IPv6.