<font size=2 face="Arial">Para ver que IOS de CISCO soportan la funcionalidad
de ipv6 te recomiendo que entres al link:</font><br><br><a href=http://tools.cisco.com/Support/Fusion/FusionHome.do><font size=2 face="Arial">http://tools.cisco.com/Support/Fusion/FusionHome.do</font></a><br><br><font size=2 face="Arial">Tienes que ejecutar el Software Advisor,
te preguntará el hardware que tienes y la funcionalidad que necesitas (en
este caso ipv6) con esos datos el te recomienda la versión de IOS a usar.</font><br><br><font size=2 face="Arial">Saludos</font><br><br><font size=2 face="Arial">Valeriano</font><br><br><br><br><font size=1 color=white face="Frutiger-Light"> </font><br><font size=1 face="Arial"><b>"Carlos M. Martinez"</b></font><br><font size=1 face="Arial">Enviado por: lactf-bounces@lacnic.net</font><br><font size=1 face="Arial">21/05/2013 16:58</font><br><font size=1 face="Arial">Por favor, responda a lactf</font><br><table width=100%><tr><td bgcolor=white><font size=1 color=#808080 face="Arial">Para: </font><td bgcolor=white valign=top><br><font size=1 face="Arial">lactf@lac.ipv6tf.org</font><tr><td bgcolor=white><font size=1 color=#808080 face="Arial">cc: </font><td bgcolor=white valign=top><tr><td bgcolor=white><font size=1 color=#808080 face="Arial">Asunto: </font><td bgcolor=white valign=top><font size=1 face="Arial">Re: [LAC-TF] [LACNIC/Seguridad]
Fwd: IPv6 Address Analysis - Privacy In, Transition Out</font></table><br><br><br><tt><font size=2>En esta época mas bien tendrías que preguntar 'cuales
NO soportan IPv6'.<br><br>A menos que te interese algún feature especial, la pila base esta<br>implementada en todos esos sistemas operativos, con el bien conocido<br>problema de que XP no hace consultas de DNS por IPv6.<br><br>s2<br><br>~C.<br><br>On 5/21/13 11:46 AM, GGL wrote:<br>> Estimados Señores(as)<br>> <br>> Estoy realizando un trabajo de implementación IPv6, en la Universidad
en<br>> la cual laboro.<br>> Necesito saber si conocen de algún site, que contengan tablas de cuales<br>> IOS de cisco <br>> soporten IPv6, asi también para las diferentes plataformas operativas<br>> WindowsXP y<br>> distribuciones de Linux<br>> <br>> Gracias a todos.<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> 2013/5/17 Arturo Servin <aservin@lacnic.net <</font></tt><a href=mailto:aservin@lacnic.net><tt><font size=2>mailto:aservin@lacnic.net</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2>>><br>> <br>> <br>> Muy interesante artículo
de Internet Society, gracias por<br>> compartir.<br>> <br>> Y que bien que usaron tu
trabajo para generar algunos<br>> resultados, felicidades!<br>> <br>> Slds<br>> as<br>> <br>> On 17 May 2013, at 00:10, Fernando Gont wrote:<br>> <br>> > FYI.<br>> ><br>> > Fuente:<br>> ><br>> <</font></tt><a href="http://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2013/05/ipv6-address-analysis-privacy-transition-out"><tt><font size=2>http://www.internetsociety.org/blog/2013/05/ipv6-address-analysis-privacy-transition-out</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2>><br>> ><br>> > ---- cut here ----<br>> > IPv6 Address Analysis - Privacy In, Transition
Out<br>> > Mat Ford<br>> ><br>> > IPv6 addresses come in a variety of forms. Examining
the<br>> bit-patterns of<br>> > an IPv6 address can tell us, or give a strong indication,
about<br>> the way<br>> > that it was generated. In early work on the subject,
Dave Malone<br>> > explains, "IPv6 addresses are longer than
IPv4 addresses, and are so<br>> > capable of greater expression. Given an IPv6 address,
conventions and<br>> > standards allow us to draw conclusions about how
IPv6 is being used on<br>> > the node with that address."<br>> ><br>> > At the recent Internet Engineering Protocol Group
(IEPG) meeting in<br>> > Orlando, Florida, Fernando Gont presented his work
on Scanning the<br>> IPv6<br>> > Internet: theory & practice. The much larger
address space of IPv6<br>> makes<br>> > crude brute-force network scans unfeasible. In
his presentation<br>> Fernando<br>> > talked about the ways in which IPv6 changes the
network reconnaissance<br>> > game because of this and he also presented the
IPv6 Toolkit suite of<br>> > IPv6 security and troubleshooting tools that he
has developed.<br>> ><br>> > Gont has built on Malone's earlier work by providing
a tool (address6)<br>> > to analyse large numbers of IPv6 addresses and
classify them into<br>> > various categories depending on whether they appear
to be<br>> > auto-generated, randomised privacy addresses, manually
configured<br>> > low-byte or IPv4-based addresses and so on. These
categories are<br>> > described in more detail in the IETF Operational
Security Capabilities<br>> > for IP Network Infrastructure (opsec) Working Group
document, "Network<br>> > Reconnaissance in IPv6 Networks."<br>> ><br>> > Malone's results are presented in Figure 1. As
the opsec WG document<br>> > observes, '[Malone's] are the most comprehensive
address-measurement<br>> > results that have so far been made publicly available',
and,<br>> 'evolution<br>> > of IPv6 implementations, changes in the IPv6 address
selection policy,<br>> > etc. since [Malone2008] was published might limit
(or even<br>> obsolete) the<br>> > validity of these results.'<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > [Figure 1 - Results from Malone2008]<br>> ><br>> > Given some webserver logs and Gont's address6 tool
it is fairly<br>> trivial<br>> > to explore whether the ratios of client address
types have in fact<br>> > changed since 2008. Using the last 12 months worth
of webserver<br>> logs for<br>> > the Internet Society's website, comprising over
50,000 unique IPv6<br>> > addresses, the following results were obtained.<br>> ><br>> > Less than 2% of connections used the 6to4 transition
technology while<br>> > the remainder were native IPv6 connections, a mark
of the growing<br>> > maturity of the IPv6 Internet. This result is mirrored
in the IPv6<br>> > statistics produced by Google that show that the
use of transition<br>> > technology has been declining since 2010 and now
less than 1% of users<br>> > that access Google over IPv6 are using a transition
technology. It's<br>> > also probably worth noting that we saw no Teredo
connections in<br>> the period.<br>> ><br>> > Figure 2 shows a more detailed analysis of the
interface<br>> identifiers in<br>> > the sample. This is very strikingly different to
Malone's results from<br>> > 2008 and clearly shows the impact of changes to
IPv6<br>> implementations in<br>> > the intervening period. The vast majority (nearly
70%) of<br>> addresses are<br>> > now classified as 'Randomized', while the auto-configured<br>> addresses that<br>> > previously comprised 50% of the sample are now
less than 8%.<br>> IPv4-based<br>> > addresses are still a significant proportion (nearly
14%) and the<br>> > manually-generated 'low-byte' addresses are just
over 6%, similar to<br>> > Malone's result.<br>> ><br>> > [Figure 2 - IPv6 Interface ID analysis]<br>> ><br>> > These measurement results update the public understanding
of IPv6<br>> > address types in use today and show us that randomized
interface<br>> > identifiers are far more prevalent than they used
to be. It is also<br>> > notable that transition technologies (Teredo and
6to4) are either<br>> > non-existent or very little used on the IPv6 Internet
of 2013.<br>> ><br>> > Acknowledgements: Thanks to Peter Godwin at the
Internet Society for<br>> > providing access to the webserver logs necessary
for this analysis.<br>> > ---- cut here ----<br>> ><br>> > Saludos,<br>> > --<br>> > Fernando Gont<br>> > SI6 Networks<br>> > e-mail: fgont@si6networks.com <</font></tt><a href=mailto:fgont@si6networks.com><tt><font size=2>mailto:fgont@si6networks.com</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2>><br>> > PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4
AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > _______________________________________________<br>> > Seguridad mailing list<br>> > Seguridad@lacnic.net <</font></tt><a href=mailto:Seguridad@lacnic.net><tt><font size=2>mailto:Seguridad@lacnic.net</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2>><br>> > </font></tt><a href=https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/seguridad><tt><font size=2>https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/seguridad</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>> <br>> _______________________________________________<br>> LACTF mailing list<br>> lactf@lac.ipv6tf.org <</font></tt><a href=mailto:lactf@lac.ipv6tf.org><tt><font size=2>mailto:lactf@lac.ipv6tf.org</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2>><br>> </font></tt><a href=https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lactf><tt><font size=2>https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lactf</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> -- <br>> “Aquellos que están en guerra con otros, no están en paz con
ellos<br>> mismos.” William Harvey<br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> <br>> _______________________________________________<br>> LACTF mailing list<br>> lactf@lac.ipv6tf.org<br>> </font></tt><a href=https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lactf><tt><font size=2>https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lactf</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br>> <br>_______________________________________________<br>LACTF mailing list<br>lactf@lac.ipv6tf.org<br></font></tt><a href=https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lactf><tt><font size=2>https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lactf</font></tt></a><tt><font size=2><br><br>______________________________________________________________________<br>This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.<br>______________________________________________________________________<br></font></tt><br><font face="sans-serif"><p>***********Internet Email Confidentiality Footer*************</p>
<p>This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the organization or individual to whom they are addressed. It is expressly forbidden to retransmit or copy email and/or this attached files without our permission. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply email. Please advise immediately if you or your employer does not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.</p>
<p>****** Confidencialidad de Correo electrónico de Internet ******</p>
<p>Este correo electrónico y cualquier archivo transmitido con el, es confidencial y destinado exclusivamente para el empleo de la organización o el individuo a quien esta dirigido. Esta expresamente prohibido su reenvio o copia del correo electrónico y/o de los archivos anexados sin permiso del remitente. El contenido esta protegido según la regulación sobre la Protección de Datos e Información Personal. Si usted no es el destinatario indicado en este mensaje (o responsable de la entrega del mensaje a tal persona), no puede copiar, reenviar o entregar este mensaje. En tal caso, usted debe destruir este mensaje y notificar al remitente por el correo electrónico de respuesta. Puede notificar igualmente si no desea recibir correos electrónicos de esta clase. Las opiniones, conclusiones y otra información en este mensaje que no se relaciona con la actividad de la compañía ni serán entendidas como autorizadas por ésta.</p></font>