[31073] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: When IPv6 ... if ever?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (batz)
Fri Sep 8 14:00:29 2000
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:06:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: batz <batsy@vapour.net>
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <200009072203.HAA27869@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009080854460.32867-100000@intrepid.vapour.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Masataka Ohta wrote:
:> Besides IPSec, dynamic addressing, authentication and improved
:> security, are there other benefits to deploying IPv6 instead of
:> NAT?
:
:Are you saying that there has been some studies done on IPv6 that it
:does offer dynamic addressing, authentication and improved security?
:
:Where can I find it?
I'm assuming you're being facetious. Those features can be done
with v4 and v6, using DHCP, IPSec, and ideally some other features.
If v6 is going to come into widespread use on the net, it has to
be in production somewhere. Firewalled corporate networks are as
sterile an environment to unleash it as any. As it stands, NAT
was just a hack to conserve address space, and now that there
are 'functional' v6 implementations maybe it's time to start
thinking of a strategy for deployment.
The reason I was asking if a study was done was to find out if
there was any good reason, beyond curiosity, to deploy v6 on
private production networks.
If not, how long should we expect to have to tolerate vendor
hubris and bad hacks to get around depleted address space?
--
batz
Chief Reverse Engineer
Superficial Intelligence Research
Defective Technologies
