Re: Kernel 2.6 IPV6 Busted

[Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>]

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