[171152] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Requirements for IPv6 Firewalls
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Florian Weimer)
Sat Apr 19 06:24:05 2014
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: Simon Perreault <simon@per.reau.lt>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2014 12:23:37 +0200
In-Reply-To: <53516168.6010002@per.reau.lt> (Simon Perreault's message of
"Fri, 18 Apr 2014 13:31:20 -0400")
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
* Simon Perreault:
> Le 2014-04-18 13:25, Mike Hale a =E9crit :
>> I agree with Bill. You can poopoo NAT all you want, but it's a fact
>> of most networks and will continue to remain so until you can make a
>> compelling case to move away from it.
>
> Does that mean all IPv6 firewalls should support NAT?
In the sense that they "MUST be able to provide email filtering
features": yes.
> Remember, we're aiming for a base set of requirements applying to
> all IPv6 firewalls.
The document has more than just base requirements.
