[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: IPv6-PMP?
Hi,
On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 11:49:40 -0700
james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com> wrote:
> On Apr 12, 2007, at 19:08, Thomas Narten wrote:
> >
> > As much as I am no fan of NAT, NAT is made even worse by the lack
> > of standards and predictability in what has been deployed.
> >
> > Will we see the same with firewalls? This is an important question,
> > given that a premise of IPv6 is to restore end-to-end addressing.
> > We won't see that if firewalls effectively block all inbound
> > connections by default.
>
> End-to-end addressing isn't going away unless the various open
> threats of IPv6 NAT get more traction, which I don't yet see
> happening. (At the moment, I can only think of one compelling reason
> to implement IPv6 NAT, and I don't consider it a particularly big
> threat because I don't see it actually destroying end-to-end
> addressing. It will happen, though. In fact, it's on my medium-term
> list of things to do, mainly because otherwise I don't have a good
> mechanism for redirecting IPv6 flows into application layer gateways.)
Are you able to clarify the above a bit further? Are you saying
that you're planning on implementing NAT for IPv6, so that you can
"transparently" intercept connections/flows and have them processed by middle
boxes in the network ?
<snip>
Thanks,
Mark.