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

IPv6 deployment excuses

Subject: IPv6 deployment excuses
From: jared at puck.nether.net (Jared Mauch)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2016 07:12:22 -0400
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <CAAAas8FTX1Bn9hMMbTP4tLusxW-mRs1L+e8Thnz4QpFuH6pHBg@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

Actually they are not that great. Look at the DDoS mess that UPnP has created and problems for IoT (I call it Internet of trash, as most devices are poorly implemented without safety in mind) folks on all sides. 

The fact that I go to a hotel and that AT&T mobility have limited internet reach is a technology problem that we all must work to fix. 

Jared Mauch

> On Jul 1, 2016, at 11:49 PM, Masataka Ohta <mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
> 
> 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.

Follow-Ups:
- IPv6 deployment excuses
  - From: mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta)

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)
- IPv6 deployment excuses
  - From: mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta)

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