Re: Review: draft-ietf-v6ops-nap-01.txt

[Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>]

On Aug 23, 2005, at 3:17 PM, Gunter Van de Velde (gvandeve) wrote:

> Unfortunatly the industry need for having a tool to provide  
> topology hiding is
> real.... and is very easy to deploy in the IPv4 world by using  
> address translation, hence
> the IPv6 community better provides some solution for this and the  
> MIPv6
> one seems most appropriate to me at the moment. (The /128 ULA's is  
> a different
> story)

Compared to having an address space one doesn't advertise outside,  
mobile ip v6 seems really complex. I'm not fond of ULAs, but as I  
said in another context, simply having a prefix that is not  
advertised seems quite sufficient for hiding internal-only systems.  
And it's only the internal-only systems any of this hides; systems  
that can be seen from the outside can be seen from the outside, and  
the fact that they are on the same or different LANs is really window- 
dressing compared to that.