Re: IESG position on NAT traversal and IPv4/IPv6

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

 



Masataka Ohta wrote:
> 
> Jari Arkko wrote:
> > 
> > NAT/FW traversal is also important even 
> > with IPv6, as you may have a firewall even in IPv6 (or be going through 
> > a NAT64).
> 
> FYI, traversable firewall is, by definition, broken.

The reason why the internet hasn't completely collapsed by now
(with half of the nodes being PC drones) are the use of
firewalls&NATs to seperate "internal" networks from the internet,
be it home, organizational or governmental.

Try to convince folks to completely remove all outside doors,
windows, window gates, curtain, blinds, flyscreens from
their home to "leverage" many convenient un-restricted openings
to the interior of the house.  I doubt you mind a lot of followers,
and some of those who do might quickly and painfully find out that
the original access scheme to their house did have a few non-marginal
advantages for life, limb and property.


If your plan is to further delay IPv6 as long as possible, then
making it dependent on unrestricted end-to-end IPv6 connectivity
might be the most reliable approach to ensure the maximum pain
and resistance.


-Martin
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


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