On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 11:05:06PM -0700, Tom Eastep wrote: > Andrew Suffield wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 01:04:07PM +1000, Paul Gear wrote: > >> Andrew Suffield wrote: > >>> ... > >>>> But beware -- ipt6tables does not support any form of NAT. > >>> So if you want to deploy ipv6 in production alongside an existing ipv4 > >>> network (like, say, the internet), then you're screwed. > >> No, you're simply obliged to route IPv6, even if your current IPv4 setup > >> uses NAT. My understanding is that the formulators of IPv6 view NAT as > >> a hack that works around the limitations in IPv4 that they removed in > >> IPv6. To a certain extent i understand their philosophy, although i'm > >> not convinced NAT is as evil as they say it is... > > > > I think you missed the point - if the only way to handle a combined > > ipv4/ipv6 setup is to use ip6tables for everything, then you cannot > > use NAT for your *ipv4* network. > > I'm currently running a combined IPv4/IPv6 router that is using NAT for > IPv4 and straight routing for IPv6. I'm using Shorewall (iptables) for > the IPv4 firewall and I'm using ip6tables for the IPv6 firewall (until I > get Shorewall6 running)
Interesting - so how do you handle traffic moving between the ipv4 and ipv6 networks? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Shorewall-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel
