[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Kernel 2.6 IPV6 Busted

To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.6 IPV6 Busted
From: Denis Vlasenko <vda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 16:02:53 +0200
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Quantum Scientific <Info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <422497BA.9090606@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <200502270928.44402.Info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200503011207.34029.vda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <422497BA.9090606@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.5.4
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.

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