[64605] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [arin-announce] IPv4 Address Space (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Simon Lockhart)
Wed Oct 29 06:06:07 2003
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2003 11:03:11 +0000
From: Simon Lockhart <simon.lockhart@bbc.co.uk>
To: Dave Howe <DaveHowe@gmx.co.uk>
Cc: "Email List: nanog" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <035901c39e0b$7a7eb920$c71121c2@exchange.sharpuk.co.uk>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
No.
Anything that relies on knowing which host it is talking to by looking at
the source address of packets breaks.
Plenty of UDP based apps work over NAT.
Simon
On Wed Oct 29, 2003 at 10:57:35AM -0000, Dave Howe wrote:
>
> Avleen Vig wrote:
> > If "more IP addresses" is the only motivation for using IPv6, it's
> > really not enough. For environments where direct access to the
> > internet isn't required, NAT serves perfectly well.
> IPSec, SIP/VoIP or almost anything that relies on UDP borks on NAT,
> doesn't it?
--
Simon Lockhart | Tel: +44 (0)1628 407720 (x37720) | Si fractum
Technology Manager | Fax: +44 (0)1628 407701 (x37701) | non sit, noli
BBC Internet Operations | Email: Simon.Lockhart@bbc.co.uk | id reficere
BBC Technology, Maiden House, Vanwall Road, Maidenhead. SL6 4UB. UK
