nanog mailing list archives
Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
From: Jack Bates <jbates () brightok net>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 19:00:17 -0600
Mark Newton wrote:
On a commodity consumer CPE device, the ALG code doubles as a stateful inspection engine. So it _is_ required when address translations are not being performed.
Hmmmm, the code may be there, but I suspect that not all of it will apply to v6 and be used.
Is security something that gets thought about now, or post-deployment?
I suspect that depends on who you ask. Security is always the top of my list. That being said, what security is there in removing NAT from v4 because it broke what the customer wanted to do? Then they are back to their host based stateful firewall; which apparently everyone believes is not good enough. Might as well throw in v6 and trash the NAT.
Jack
Current thread:
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space, (continued)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Stephen Sprunk (Feb 07)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Ricky Beam (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Jack Bates (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Owen DeLong (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Stephen Sprunk (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Mark Newton (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Owen DeLong (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Mark Newton (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Jack Bates (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Mark Newton (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Jack Bates (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Matthew Kaufman (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Mark Andrews (Feb 09)
- RE: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space TJ (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space John Peach (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Seth Mattinen (Feb 09)
- RE: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space TJ (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Jack Bates (Feb 09)
- RE: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space TJ (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Mark Andrews (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Matthew Kaufman (Feb 09)