Robert Moskowitz - le (m/j/a) 4/2/09 10:25 PM:
Tony Hain wrote:
In any case, the 66nat effort is a solution looking for a problem, but
if it
does exist it should be based on technical rather than policy issues.
Can we develop a list of techincal issues that are drivers for IPv6NATs?
Address Independence
and multihoming?
Topology hiding
Address Amplification
draft-despres-sam-02 has a list
2.1. Private addressing (easy renumbering) . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Basic firewall (by default, no incoming connections) . . . 4
2.3. Site multihoming (automatic fallback) . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.4. Privacy protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.5. Host-rooted subnets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
It contains a brief explanation of what each item means, and propposes a
technical solution for each of them.
It is I believe a contribution in the direction you are looking for.
Regards,
RD
_______________________________________________
nat66 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
