[GRLUG] Regarding NAT and IPv6

[megadave]

<quote>NAT is also a piece of crap as it breaks certain protocols (for
clear example look at FTP in the early days), and kills the entire
idea of peer to peer reachability and end to end accountability (ever
tried to track NAT'd connections through multiple translations at
multiple sites, pain in the arse).</quote>

I'd reply at that site, but I dont see how to do so...

My comment on this would be, "Sometimes that is INTENTIONAL - it is
the DESIRED result to have an 'internal' network which is not directly
reachable by external hosts. And quite frankly, any protocol which was
developed once NAT became common (so ftp is off the hook) that doesn't
work with NAT, is ITSELF broken, IMNSHO"


On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:05, Michael Mol <mikemol at gmail.com> wrote:
> A recurring question I get about IPv6 is NAT.
>
> Here's a good thread to dive into, if that's something that'd be on
> your mind: http://www.reddit.com/r/ipv6/comments/pj4ij/why_the_hate_for_nat66/
>
> --
> :wq
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
> _______________________________________________
> grlug mailing list
> grlug at grlug.org
> http://shinobu.grlug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/grlug

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.