[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: quietly....
- From: jra at baylink.com (Jay Ashworth)
- Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 12:00:40 -0500 (EST)
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Iljitsch van Beijnum" <iljitsch at muada.com>
> On 3 feb 2011, at 17:16, Jon Lewis wrote:
> > When someone breaks or shuts off that filter, traffic through the
> > NAPT firewall stops working. On the stateful firewall with public
> > IPs on both sides, everything works...including the traffic you
> > didn't want.
> > People are going to want NAT66...and not providing it may slow down
> > IPv6 adoption.
> Hm, if you turn off the NAT66 function, wouldn't the traffic pass
> through unhindered, too?
> Or do you propose to make IPv6 home gateways the same way IPv4 home
> gateways work, where it's usually not even possible to turn it off?
I think the implication includes available 1918-like space to use behind
the NAT which is similarly publicly non-routable; *this* is the part we
care about -- that those addresses are only accessible *to the edge router*.
- From: iljitsch at muada.com (Iljitsch van Beijnum)