nanog mailing list archives
Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6)
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch () muada com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 15:13:16 +0200
On 2-okt-2007, at 15:05, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Please explain how you plan on getting rid of those protocol-aware plugins when IPv6 is widely deployed in environments with -stateful firewalls-.
You just open up a hole in the firewall where appropriate.You can have an ALG, the application or the OS do this. As you probably know by now, I don't favor the ALG approach.
End-to-end-ness is and has been "busted" in the corporate world AFAICTfor a number of years. IPv6 "people" seem to think that simply providingglobally unique addressing to all endpoints will remove NAT and all associated trouble. Guess what - it probably won't.
If you don't want end-to-end, be a man (or woman) and use a proxy. Don't tell the applications they they are connected to the rest of the world and then pull the rug from under them. This works in IPv4 today but don't expect this to carry over to IPv6. At least not without a long, bloody fight.
Current thread:
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6), (continued)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Iljitsch van Beijnum (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) John Curran (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) John Curran (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Iljitsch van Beijnum (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) John Curran (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Iljitsch van Beijnum (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Adrian Chadd (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Iljitsch van Beijnum (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Stephen Sprunk (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Duane Waddle (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Stephen Sprunk (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Daniel Senie (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Iljitsch van Beijnum (Oct 03)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Adrian Chadd (Oct 03)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Mark Newton (Oct 02)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Iljitsch van Beijnum (Oct 03)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Mark Newton (Oct 03)
- Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Randy Bush (Oct 03)