nanog mailing list archives
Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:13:10 -0700
In all reality: 1. NAT has nothing to do with security. Stateful inspection provides security, NAT just mangles addresses. 2. In the places where NAT works, it does so at a terrible cost. It breaks a number of things, and, applications like Skype are incredibly more complex pieces of code in order to solve NAT traversal. The elimination of NAT is one of the greatest features of IPv6. Most customers don't know or care what NAT is and wouldn't know the difference between a NAT firewall and a stateful inspection firewall. I do think that people will get rid of the NAT box by and large, or, at least in IPv6, the box won't be NATing. Whether or not they NAT it, it's still better to give the customer enough addresses that they don't HAVE to NAT. Owen On Jul 22, 2010, at 7:53 PM, Akyol, Bora A wrote:
As long as customers believe that having a NAT router/"firewall" in place is a security feature, I don't think anyone is going to get rid of the NAT box. In all reality, NAT boxes do work for 99% of customers out there. Bora On 7/22/10 7:34 PM, "Owen DeLong" <owen () delong com> wrote: Well, wouldn't it be better if the provider simply issued enough space to make NAT66 unnecessary? Owen
Current thread:
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course, (continued)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Mark Smith (Jul 21)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Antonio M. Moreiras (Jul 21)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Alex Band (Jul 22)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Matthew Walster (Jul 22)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 22)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Matthew Kaufman (Jul 22)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Owen DeLong (Jul 22)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Akyol, Bora A (Jul 22)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Mark Smith (Jul 22)
- RE: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Frank Bulk - iName.com (Jul 22)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Owen DeLong (Jul 22)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Jens Link (Jul 23)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Owen DeLong (Jul 23)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Jens Link (Jul 25)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Matthew Palmer (Jul 25)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Antonio M. Moreiras (Jul 21)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Mark Smith (Jul 21)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Akyol, Bora A (Jul 27)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Owen DeLong (Jul 27)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Mark Smith (Jul 29)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Tim Franklin (Jul 29)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 24)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Saku Ytti (Jul 24)