Re: Last Call: 'Teredo: Tunneling IPv6 over UDP through NATs' to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



At 12:27 PM +0200 9/27/04, Francis Dupont wrote:
 - I don't believe the protocol works with NATs using global addresses
   on both sides (yes, this is a stupid way to use NATs but one can say
   that using NATs is already stupid :-)

If you mean "non-private" on both sides, there is a very good reason for such NATs (well, if you believe that there is any reason for NATs). You have a Class C from your ISP and have hard-wired values in dozens of boxes, have gotten certificates for some of the IP addresses, have hard-wired the IP address in other places, and so on. One day they call and say "we've changed your IP range just because we can". Tossing everything behind a NAT using the old addresses keeps everything working until you can handle the transition.


--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]