ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Why IPv6 is a must?

2001-11-26 09:30:03
Rinka Singh wrote:

Please can you help me understand how it gets in the way.

As I understand these devices would:
- accept (authenticated) commands - perhaps snmp (there's some thought
of using sip proxy commands) format.
- send status/traps (snmp again).

Any NAT would be able to translate both ways - OK it would stumble if
there was end-to-end encryption but a small device may not have
encryption capability.  It should be easy to add NAT (one would need a
router, firewall, gateway/gatekeeper anyway).

If the issue is only that of encryption then I accept your point.  But
perhaps I'm missing something.  I'm looking for reasons why NAT/v4
cannot/will not address the needs of the new devices.

If you have a few hundred devices in your house that need to act as
peers (not clients) to devices outside, they need to be addressable.
[we could have a digression on my choice of word, but I think it's
beside the point.] If they are all hidden behind one IPv4 address,
then a sub-addressing system is needed, and I'm not sure what you
think it will be, unless you want to use a well-known port number
for each device. It will just be *easier* to use IPv6 as the
addressing scheme - initially via RFC 3056, I expect. It also
solves the e2e encryption problem, as you say.

   Brian



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>