Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-nap-00.txt <PROXIES>

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> I agree with Mark. There is nothing specific to IPv6 about proxies;
> they work equally well for IPv4. As a matter of fact a proxy
> can be a very useful v4/v6 coexistence tool. I prefer that they
> should be mentioned in a few words in the NAP draft, but nothing
> more.

There are actually enterprises (v4) today that do not allow any 
communication between "inside" and "outside" except using explicitly 
defined proxies. (E.g., maybe just HTTP(S), nothing more).

That is, especially in strictly controlled environments where the 
nodes actually don't have global v6 addresses or wouldn't use them, 
using proxies might fulfill the topology hiding (and maybe other) 
perceived requirements.

In any case, proxies become a necessity when ULAs are used.  The 
situation differs because in v4 you can use NAT ("implicit proxy") 
instead.

These issues might warrant some amount of discussion, especially if 
(IETF) work needs to happen on how the client machines are configured 
to use the right proxies.

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings