Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6)

From: Iljitsch van Beijnum (no email)
Date: Tue Oct 02 2007 - 15:50:09 EDT

  • Next message: Iljitsch van Beijnum: "Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6)"

    On 2-okt-2007, at 16:55, Mark Newton wrote:

    >> ALGs are not the solution. They turn the internet into a telco-like
    >> network where you only get to deploy new applications when the powers
    >> that be permit you to.

    > No, they turn the Intenret into a network where you only get to
    > deploy new IPv4 applications when the powers that be permit you to.

    > So everyone will deploy IPv6 applications, which require no ALGs,
    > instead.

    > Isn't that a solution that everyone can be happy with?

    Well, I can think of a couple of things that make me unhappy:

    - IPv4 vs IPv6 is completely invisible to the user. I regularly run
    netstat or tcpdump to see which I'm using, I doubt many people will
    do that. So if IPv6 works and IPv4 doesn't, that will look like
    random breakage to the untrained user rather than something they can
    do something about.

    - If we do NAT-PT and the ALGs are implemented and then the
    application workarounds around the ALGs, it's only a very small step
    to wide scale IPv6 NAT.


  • Next message: Iljitsch van Beijnum: "Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6)"





    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs



    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD