From: Sam Stickland (no email)
Date: Mon Jun 04 2007 - 05:52:57 EDT
Jared Mauch wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 02:28:34PM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> As more and more cool IPv6 applications and services are becoming
>> available, I converted the former FAQ entry we had on this into a more
>> easily found/remembered page.
>>
>
> I was doing some searching and came across the following slides
> from Gert on his operational experiences with IPv6. Not sure if others
> are interested, but it's worthwhile to take a few moments to look at.
>
> http://www.icann.org/meetings/lisbon/presentation-doering-ipv6-25mar07.pdf
>
> - Jared
>
>
In answer to two questions at the end of this document:
• what are enterprises waiting for?
• should we ditch IPv6, and live with IPv4 + NAT forever?
Personally I hate NAT. But I currently work in a large enterprise
environment and NAT is suprisingly popular. I came from a service
provider background and some of the attitudes I've discovered towards
private addresses in enterprise environments are quite surprising. Aside
for the usual proponents of using NAT to hide your internal address
infrastructure (which security always seem to insist upon) quite a
popular design rule of from seems to be "Only carry public addresses on
the public Internet and only carry private addresses on your private
network" :-|
If an Enterprise doesn't have a great deal for IP addresses that need to
be routed on the public internet, and they thing that NAT is a _good_
design choice, it seems to me that they don't have a great deal of
pressure to move to IPv6.
S
|
|
|