misunderstanding scale (was: Ipv4 end, its fake.)

Tue Mar 25 01:05:29 UTC 2014

On Mar 23, 2014, at 11:09 AM, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:

> On Sunday, March 23, 2014 06:57:26 PM Mark Andrews wrote:
> 
>> ISP's have done a good job of brain washing their
>> customers into thinking that they shouldn't be able to
>> run services from home. That all their machines
>> shouldn't have a globally unique address that is
>> theoritically reachable from everywhere.  That NAT is
>> normal and desiriable.
>> 
>> I was at work last week and because I have IPv6 at both
>> ends I could just log into the machines at home as
>> easily as if I was there. When I'm stuck using a IPv4
>> only service on the road I have to jump through lots of
>> hoops to reach the internal machines.
> 
> I expect this to change little in the enterprise space. I 
> think use of ULA and NAT66 will be one of the things 
> enterprises will push for, because how can a printer have a 
> public IPv6 address that is reachable directly from the 
> Internet, despite the fact that there is a properly 
> configured firewall at the perimetre offering half-decent 
> protection?
> 
> Mark.

So ULA the printers (if you must).

That doesn’t create a need for ULA on anything that talks to the internet, nor does it create a requirement to do NPT or NAT66.

Owen