Re: Kernel 2.6 IPV6 Busted

[Denis Vlasenko <vda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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.
--
vda