2011
DOI: 10.17487/rfc6434
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

IPv6 Node Requirements

Abstract: This document defines requirements for IPv6 nodes. It is expected that IPv6 will be deployed in a wide range of devices and situations. Specifying the requirements for IPv6 nodes allows IPv6 to function well and interoperate in a large number of situations and deployments. This document obsoletes RFC 4294. Status of This Memo This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes. This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It re… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
24
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
24
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This section identifies the main connectivity recommendations to be followed by a cellular host to attach to a network using IPv6 in addition to what is defined in [RFC6434] and [RFC7066]. Both dualstack and IPv6-only deployment models are considered.…”
Section: Connectivity Recommendationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This section identifies the main connectivity recommendations to be followed by a cellular host to attach to a network using IPv6 in addition to what is defined in [RFC6434] and [RFC7066]. Both dualstack and IPv6-only deployment models are considered.…”
Section: Connectivity Recommendationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While the original IPv6 specifications may have implied this, [RFC6434] clearly states that IPsec support is not mandatory. Moreover, if all the intra-enterprise traffic is encrypted, both malefactors and security tools that rely on payload inspection (Intrusion Prevention System (IPS), firewall, Access Control List (ACL), IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) ([RFC7011] and [RFC7012]), etc.)…”
Section: Ipv6 Is No More Secure Than Ipv4mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nevertheless, they are listed here for completeness. [231] Local network protection for IPv6 info 0 missing 0 missing 5157 [232] IPv6 Implications for Network Scanning info 1 medium 0 missing 6434 [233] IPv6 node requirements info 0 missing 1 low 6177 [234] IPv6 Address Assignment to End Sites BCP 1 low 0 missing 2072 [235] Router Renumbering Guide info 1 low 0 missing 4057 [236] IPv6 Enterprise Network Scenarios info 1 high 0 missing 5082 [237] The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) proposed 1 medium 0 missing 4192 [238] Procedures for Renumbering an IPv6 Network info 1 high 0 missing 4311 [239] Host to router load sharing proposed 1 low 0 missing 2894 [240] Router renumbering for IPv6 proposed 1 low 0 missing 5798 [241] VRRPv4 for IPv4 and IPv6 proposed 0 missing 1 medium 2464 [242] IPv6 over Ethernet proposed 0 missing 0 missing 2590 [243] IPv6 over FR proposed 0 missing 0 missing 5072 [244] IPv6 [247] FTP extensions for IPv6 and NATs proposed 0 missing 0 missing 4293 [248] MIB for IP proposed 0 missing 1 low 4292 [249] IP Forwarding Table MIB proposed 0 missing 0 missing 4022 [250] MIB for TCP proposed 0 missing 0 missing 4113 [251] MIB for UDP proposed 0 missing 0 missing 4807 [252] IPsec Security Policy Database Configuration MIB proposed 1 low 0 missing 5519 [253] Multicast Group Membership Discovery MIB proposed 0 missing 0 missing 4001 [254] Textual conventions for Internet network addresses proposed 0 missing 0 missing…”
Section: N1mentioning
confidence: 99%