draft-ietf-opsec-lla-only-09.txt		draft-ietf-opsec-lla-only-10.txt
	OPsec Working Group M. Behringer		OPsec Working Group M. Behringer
	Internet-Draft E. Vyncke		Internet-Draft E. Vyncke
	Intended status: Informational Cisco		Intended status: Informational Cisco
	Expires: January 24, 2015 July 23, 2014		Expires: January 29, 2015 July 28, 2014
	Using Only Link-Local Addressing Inside an IPv6 Network		Using Only Link-Local Addressing Inside an IPv6 Network
	draft-ietf-opsec-lla-only-09		draft-ietf-opsec-lla-only-10
	Abstract		Abstract
	In an IPv6 network it is possible to use only link-local addresses on		In an IPv6 network it is possible to use only link-local addresses on
	infrastructure links between routers. This document discusses the		infrastructure links between routers. This document discusses the
	advantages and disadvantages of this approach to help the decision		advantages and disadvantages of this approach to help the decision
	process for a given network.		process for a given network.
	Status of This Memo		Status of This Memo
	skipping to change at page 1, line 33		skipping to change at page 1, line 33
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on January 24, 2015.		This Internet-Draft will expire on January 29, 2015.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	skipping to change at page 2, line 38		skipping to change at page 2, line 38
	of a router is also not reachable beyond the link boundaries,		of a router is also not reachable beyond the link boundaries,
	therefore reducing the attack horizon.		therefore reducing the attack horizon.
	This document discusses the advantages and caveats of this approach.		This document discusses the advantages and caveats of this approach.
	Note that some traditionally used techniques to operate a network		Note that some traditionally used techniques to operate a network
	such as pinging interfaces, or seeing interface information in a		such as pinging interfaces, or seeing interface information in a
	traceroute do not work with this approach. Details are discussed		traceroute do not work with this approach. Details are discussed
	below.		below.
	During IESG review the technical correctness and completeness of the		During WG and IETF last call the technical correctness of the
	document has been fully reviewed and verified, However, IESG noted		document has been reviewed, however debate exists as to whether to
	that there was no full consensus within the working group on whether		recommend this technique. The deployment of this technique is
	to recommend this technique.		appropriate where it is found to be necessary.
	2. Using Link-Local Addressing on Infrastructure Links		2. Using Link-Local Addressing on Infrastructure Links
	This document discusses the approach of using only link-local		This document discusses the approach of using only link-local
	addresses (LLA) on all router interfaces on infrastructure links.		addresses (LLA) on all router interfaces on infrastructure links.
	Routers don't typically need to receive packets from hosts or nodes		Routers don't typically need to receive packets from hosts or nodes
	outside the network. For a network operator, there may be reasons to		outside the network. For a network operator, there may be reasons to
	use greater than link-local scope addresses on infrastructure		use greater than link-local scope addresses on infrastructure
	interfaces for certain operational tasks, such as pings to an		interfaces for certain operational tasks, such as pings to an
	interface or traceroutes across the network. This document discusses		interface or traceroutes across the network. This document discusses
End of changes. 4 change blocks.
	7 lines changed or deleted		7 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/