Because it would be impossible to maintain a DNSBL for IPV6,
Can you expand on why you think it's the case, or point me at some
discussion of it?
I haven't claimed that, but I think the idea is that the size of the v6
address space, and the amount of address space that even a tiny
customer gets, make it useless to try to identify and block bad-actor
addresses, because they'll just dodge to unblocked addresses.
There is some truth to this, but it's not that simple. DNSBLs like the
CBL, where the assignee of the IP address is not actively malicious and
thus won't be ducking out from under the listing, will be unaffected.
There are doubtless some DNSBLs which will be unable to do anything
useful in v6, but there are others that will simply start listing /64s
or /48s or some such.
It will change things, definitely. But to say it will be impossible to
maintain a DNSBL is an overstatement.
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse(_at_)rodents-montreal(_dot_)org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg