ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: myth of the great transition (was US Defense Department forma lly adopts IPv6)

2003-06-18 23:07:42
Valdis Kletnieks wrote:
The point I was making is that if an NNTP connection fails because
the firewall is *configured* to say 'None Shall Pass' (insert Monty
Python .wav here ;) then that is *proper* behavior.  If a VOIP
connection fails because the NAT is saying 'None Shall Pass', then
that's *broken* behavior.

IMHO what you don't get is that in most cases, BOTH say 'None Shall
Pass' and that would be a normal behavior for both.

Don't get me wrong, I do not defend NAT. The point I was trying to make
is this: it is a waste of time to say that NAT sucks. We know it. For
IPv4, it's too late to change. IMHO, here is the deal: IPv4 NAT does
suck, but there is nothing we can do to remove it; so the only worthy
efforts are 1) maybe try to make it less worse (I will not go as far as
saying better) and 2) let's not make the same mistake with IPv6.

Michel.




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