nanog mailing list archives
Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
From: Mark Andrews <Mark_Andrews () isc org>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 11:22:58 +1100
In message <4990C38C.8060007 () eeph com>, Matthew Kaufman writes:
Owen DeLong wrote:In terms of implementing the code, sure, the result is about the same, but, the key point here is that there really isn't a benefit to having that packet mangling code in IPv6.Unless your SOX auditor requires it in order to give you a non-qualified audit of your infrastructure.
The SOX auditor ought to know better. Any auditor that requires NAT is incompenent.
The real problem with IPv6 deployment is not that it can't be done, but that there are so many still-to-be-answered questions between here and there...
And the only way to answer them is to go ahead and find the gaps. Waiting and waiting won't find the problems and will just put you under more time presure. Mark
Matthew Kaufman
-- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews () isc org
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 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)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space John Osmon (Feb 09)
- RE: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space TJ (Feb 10)