From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Patrick Schaaf <bof@bof.de>
Subject: Re: (D)NAT with IPv6 (was "nf_conntrack & NAT")
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 10:16:57 +0100
Message-ID: <20051209091657.GD13067@oknodo.bof.de>
References: <20051123132419.GJ24091@fi.muni.cz>
	<20051206154320.GG4038@rama.exocore.com>
	<20051206173135.GQ5617@eychenne.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0512071201460.17863@blackhole.kfki.hu>
	<20051207145438.GA5617@eychenne.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0512071603190.17863@blackhole.kfki.hu>
	<20051208114120.GF5617@eychenne.org>
	<20051208115632.GB13067@oknodo.bof.de>
	<20051209045631.GC4244@rama.exocore.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0512090950520.26169@bizon.gios.gov.pl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Harald Welte <laforge@netfilter.org>, Herve Eychenne <rv@wallfire.org>,
	netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org, Patrick Schaaf <bof@bof.de>,
	Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@blackhole.kfki.hu>
Return-path: <netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org>
To: Krzysztof Oledzki <olenf@ans.pl>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0512090950520.26169@bizon.gios.gov.pl>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter-devel>,
	<mailto:netfilter-devel-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: </pipermail/netfilter-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netfilter-devel-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.netfilter.org/mailman/listinfo/netfilter-devel>,
	<mailto:netfilter-devel-request@lists.netfilter.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org
Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org
List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org

> [...] but there is no way to do it that way with public IPv4 addressess.

For all I know, separation of services has always been a valid use
of IPv4 address space, so I really don't buy your 'but there is no way'.

We are doing it. Who will sue us, on which basis? We are a RIPE member
and LIR, so pointing to RIPE policy will be best to prove your point.
Maybe I'm wrong. I'm not involved in the LIR part of the business.
But I don't think so.

best regards
  Patrick