the alleged evils of NAT, was Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough?

Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
Tue Apr 27 13:15:39 CDT 2010


On Tue, 27 Apr 2010 10:48:54 PDT, Matthew Kaufman said:

> Anyone inventing a new service/protocol that doesn't work with NAT isn't 
> planning on success.

Only true in the IPv4 world.  IPv6 will hopefully be different.

> > The answer to these questions isn't a good one for users, so
> > as the community that are best placed to defend service quality
> > and innovation by preserving the end to end principal, it is 
> > our responsibility to defend it to the best of our ability.
> >   
> Firewalls will always break the end-to-end principle, whether or not 
> addresses are identical between the inside and outside or not.

The difference is that if a protocol wants to be end-to-end, I can fix a
firewall to not break it.  You don't have that option with a NAT.

> > So get busy - v6 awareness, availability and abundancy are
> > overdue for our end users.
> >   
> Maybe. Most of them are perfectly happy.

Most of the US population was perfectly happy just before the recent
financial crisis hit.  Ignorance is bliss - but only for a little while.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 227 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20100427/94ec9346/attachment.bin>


More information about the NANOG mailing list