From: Harald Welte <laforge@netfilter.org>
To: Patrick Schaaf <bof@bof.de>
Cc: Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@blackhole.kfki.hu>,
netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org,
Herve Eychenne <rv@wallfire.org>
Subject: Re: (D)NAT with IPv6 (was "nf_conntrack & NAT")
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 10:26:31 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051209045631.GC4244@rama.exocore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051208115632.GB13067@oknodo.bof.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1031 bytes --]
On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 12:56:32PM +0100, Patrick Schaaf wrote:
> > So each time you add a service on a host, you should assign a new IP to it
> > (and create the respective DNS name for this IP/service couple!), just in
> > case you may have to redirect its traffic one day? (even if temporary)
>
> This has proven to be a very valuable strategy, at work, even for normal
> IPv4 operation. Saves headaches every time we want to migrate something.
> I can warmly recommend this practise.
I totally agree. Esp. with IPv6 there is no reason to do otherwise...
A /64 for every physical network segment, guess people still need to get
used to it.
--
- Harald Welte <laforge@netfilter.org> http://netfilter.org/
============================================================================
"Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early
architectural error that shows how much experimentation was going
on while IP was being designed." -- Paul Vixie
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-12-09 4:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-23 11:30 nf_conntrack & NAT Krzysztof Oledzki
2005-11-23 12:25 ` Yasuyuki KOZAKAI
2005-11-23 13:20 ` Herve Eychenne
2005-11-23 13:24 ` Jan Kasprzak
2005-12-06 15:43 ` Harald Welte
2005-12-06 17:31 ` Herve Eychenne
2005-12-07 7:05 ` Harald Welte
2005-12-07 7:00 ` Patrick Schaaf
2005-12-07 13:06 ` Harald Welte
2005-12-07 9:41 ` Patrick Schaaf
2005-12-07 12:02 ` (D)NAT with IPv6 (was "nf_conntrack & NAT") Herve Eychenne
2005-12-07 11:22 ` nf_conntrack & NAT Jozsef Kadlecsik
2005-12-07 14:54 ` (D)NAT with IPv6 (was "nf_conntrack & NAT") Herve Eychenne
2005-12-07 15:09 ` Jozsef Kadlecsik
2005-12-08 11:41 ` Herve Eychenne
2005-12-08 11:56 ` Patrick Schaaf
2005-12-09 4:56 ` Harald Welte [this message]
2005-12-09 8:56 ` Krzysztof Oledzki
2005-12-09 9:16 ` Patrick Schaaf
2005-12-09 4:57 ` Harald Welte
2005-12-12 20:42 ` Balazs Scheidler
2005-12-12 22:56 ` Alexander Samad
2005-12-13 8:57 ` Balazs Scheidler
[not found] ` <200511231225.jANCPmnh018866@toshiba.co.jp>
2005-11-23 13:44 ` nf_conntrack & NAT Krzysztof Oledzki
2005-11-25 4:54 ` Yasuyuki KOZAKAI
2005-11-26 23:52 ` Patrick McHardy
2005-11-27 8:42 ` Balazs Scheidler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20051209045631.GC4244@rama.exocore.com \
--to=laforge@netfilter.org \
--cc=bof@bof.de \
--cc=kadlec@blackhole.kfki.hu \
--cc=netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org \
--cc=rv@wallfire.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.