Re: IPv6 NAT?

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

 



Ralph
Have you been following this thread?  What odd questions and
assumptions...appears as if folk have no idea re: IPv6 addressing ..all end
nodes will be globally addressable for 'practical purposes' is such an odd
statement to make...either:
1.  meaning that all end nodes will have globally unique and addressable
addresses; or
2.  that all end nodes will 'automagically' be able to be reached through
the IPv6 routing and routed protocols.

Obviously #2 is sound but probably not what this person meant...

Cute...

jeff


On 2/14/08 1:16 PM, "Iljitsch van Beijnum" <iljitsch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 14 feb 2008, at 21:49, Florian Weimer wrote:
> 
>> The prevailing assumption is that IPv6 end nodes will be globally
>> addressable for practical purporses.  I think this is a very unlikely
>> outcome.
> 
> Are you saying that there will be IPv6 NAT?
> 
> And that we should design protocols running on top of IPv6 to take NAT
> into account?
> 
> If yes on both, how can we do that without a NAT specification so that
> the IETF can design protocols to work with NAT and vendors can build
> NATs that work with IETF protocols?
> 
> I.e., either we assume no NAT in IPv6, or create a NAT standard. Those
> are the only sane options.
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

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