Well arptables is officially deprecated anyway. I don't know
whether its
successor, ebtables, supports filtering of the content of NDP
messages,
but you can filter NDP messages themselves with iptables just as
any
other icmpv6 message - for example, denying them at all. Or you
add
static neighbor entries, which cannot be overwritten by
neighbor
solicitations.
In addition, the neighbor proxy serves as a
replacement for the arp
proxy in routed scenarios.
A good point to start
is using static ARP + neighbor entries for all
domUs and the gateway at eth0.
This will effectively prohibit most
working ARP / NDP attacks.
What
I'm personally missing is NAT. I know it has been dropped for good
reasons,
but NAT has some cool advantages like hiding a webserver domU
and a
mailserver domU behind a single IP address - which will obfuscate
your
virtual server structure.
We use an own private internal network within
our server, which is dual
stack with IPv4 + IPv6, using a routed setup with
static ARP + neighbor
entries, but however, I do not yet route external IPv6
addresses to the
domUs (not for an explicit reason, rather because of too
less time /
interest). I think XEN as a software is ready for IPv6, although
the
default vif-scripts do not really do much about that. But bridges
and
routing works finde with both of them, it's just a question of the
setup.
Am 07.12.2010 00:11, schrieb Simon Hobson:
> Jonathan
Tripathy wrote:
>
>> A problem with using IPv6 at the minute is
that netfilter doesn't
>> have as-advanced filtering capabilities as it
does with IPv4. This is
>> important when your DomUs are for customers
on an unmanaged basis.
>>
>> The main issue is that IPv6
doesn't use ARP anymore, so all MAC
>> address detection is done in the
IP layer and AFAIK, netfilter
>> doesn't have the proper filtering for
IPv6 to prevent MAC spoofing.
>> What we really need is an IPv6
equivalent to arptables.
>
> Since you clearly know quite a bit more
than I do about IPv6 - can you
> recommend a good guide/primer for getting
going ? At the moment I know
> a little bit - but mostly what I know is
that it's quite a bit
> different from IPv4 and it's not a case of "the
same but more bits".
>
> It's really about time I started looking at
this for
work.
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-users
mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
| Previous by Date: | [Xen-users] How to change the bash into the hvc0 , Xavier Delcour |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Xen-users] HVM-guest doesn't boot from virtual disk , Alexander Wendland |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [Xen-users] IPV4 is nearly depleted, are you ready for IPV6? , Felix Kuperjans |
| Next by Thread: | RE: [Xen-users] IPV4 is nearly depleted, are you ready for IPV6? , Simon Hobson |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |