[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

IPv6 deployment excuses

Subject: IPv6 deployment excuses
From: mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:49:50 +0900
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <CAAAas8FTX1Bn9hMMbTP4tLusxW-mRs1L+e8Thnz4QpFuH6pHBg@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

Jared Mauch wrote:

> https://youtu.be/v26BAlfWBm8
>
> Is always good for a reminder and laughs on a holiday weekend.

But, end to end NATs are actually good:

	https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ohta-e2e-nat-00

fully transparent to all the transport and application layer
protocols.

And, to applications running over TCP/UDP, UPnP capable legacy
NATs are transparent, if host TCP/UDP are modified to perform
reverse NAT, information to do so is provided by UPnP.

						Masataka Ohta

Follow-Ups:
- IPv6 deployment excuses
  - From: jared at puck.nether.net (Jared Mauch)

References:
- IPv6 deployment excuses
  - From: mike at mikejones.in (Mike Jones)
- IPv6 deployment excuses
  - From: hugo at slabnet.com (Hugo Slabbert)
- IPv6 deployment excuses
  - From: jared at puck.nether.net (Jared Mauch)

Prev by Date: NAT firewall for IPv6?
Next by Date: IPv6 deployment excuses
Previous by thread: IPv6 deployment excuses
Next by thread: IPv6 deployment excuses
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread