[156051] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Blocking MX query
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Tue Sep 4 23:45:43 2012
In-Reply-To: <5046C9AE.4090101@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 09:15:12 +0530
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com>
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Masataka Ohta
<mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
> While ISPs in the future should use not IPv6 but NAT with fixed
> IP addresses and sets of port numbers assigned to their customers,
> keeping the end to end transparency, it does not solve the
> problem of blocked port 25.
>
> Note that IPv6 do not solve the problem of blocked port 25, either.
So - now with ipv6 you're going to see "hi, my toto highly
computerized toilet is trying to make outbound port 25 connections to
gmail"
http://www.telecoms.com/48734/vodafone-and-ibm-team-up-on-connected-home-appliances/
--
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
