Re: Kernel 2.6 IPV6 Busted

[Denis Vlasenko <vda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sunday 27 February 2005 23:35, David S. Miller wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 14:10:39 -0600
> Quantum Scientific <Info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > I am skeptical about this assertion that the whole internet needs to be 
> > hashed 
> > if connection tracking.
> 
> Connection tracking and NAT broke entirely the end-to-end host
> assumption that used to be valid on the internet.
> 
> 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...
--
vda