- Previous message: Sam Stickland: "Re: Cool IPv6 Stuff"
- Maybe in reply to: Jeroen Massar: "Cool IPv6 Stuff"
- Next in thread: Sam Stickland: "Re: Cool IPv6 Stuff"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
|
|
|
From: Adrian Chadd (no email)
Date: Mon Jun 04 2007 - 06:10:03 EDT
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007, Sam Stickland wrote:
> 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.
In fact, and call me crazy, but I can't help but wonder how many enterprises
out there will see IPv6 and its concept of "real IPs for all machines,
internal and external!" and respond with "Hell No."
Anyone got any numbers for that? I'm happy to admit I don't. :)
Adrian
|
|
|