From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: Kernel 2.6 IPV6 Busted Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 14:12:40 -0500 Message-ID: <42261028.7030301@pobox.com> References: <200502270928.44402.Info@Quantum-Sci.com> <200503011207.34029.vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua> <422497BA.9090606@pobox.com> <200503021602.53663.vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , Quantum Scientific , netdev@oss.sgi.com To: Denis Vlasenko In-Reply-To: <200503021602.53663.vda@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Denis Vlasenko wrote: > On Tuesday 01 March 2005 18:26, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >>>>There are many very important optimizations we've had to disable >>>>by default just in TCP alone because of NAT. >>> >>>I don't think future Internet will be safe enough to open >>>corporate networks. I definitely won't do it. >>>NAT firewall in front of my net is an absolute requirement >>>for me. >>> >>>However, IPv6 in Internet won't happen tomorrow, >>>no rush... >> >>You don't need NAT to secure a corporate network. > > > I don't want outside world to even KNOW that I have a network > behind the firewall box. I don't want them to know > internal hosts' IPs. ...thus breaking the end-to-end connection model, and various protocols. Jeff