[ipv6hackers] IPv6 security (slides and training)
cb.list6 at gmail.com
Fri Nov 18 01:28:25 CET 2011
On Nov 17, 2011 3:47 PM, "fred bovy" <fred at fredbovy.com> wrote:
> Le 12/11/11 01:09, « Doug Barton » <dougb at dougbarton.us> a écrit :
> >On 11/11/2011 16:05, Douglas Otis wrote:
> >> On 11/11/11 2:40 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> >>> > I think that the IPv4 folks will quickly have problems
> >>> > communicating with
> >>> >> their partners and customers running IPv6.
> >>> ... which is one of the big motivations to not be a first-mover to
> >>> IPv6 in the first place.
> >> Doug,
> >> Disagree. These partners also likely represent the land of
> >> opportunity. Rather than receiving a growing portion of traffic over
> >> LSNs, offering IPv6 connectivity conveys better information when
> >> deciding which exchanges to permit. In addition, direct access better
> >> prevents MitM and broken double NAT issues.
> >You guys keep missing the part where *I* agree with you.
> >The question isn't, "Is IPv6 the right answer?" The question is, "Why do
> >so many organizations believe that CGN is a better answer?"
> REALLY???? So give me some references of SP who have deployed NAT444???
> I am curiousŠ
Many mobile providers provide mifi hotspots or hotspots on phones that are
The mobile provider does Nat44 in their core and the android phone or mifi
does nat44 providing addresses to the tethered clients / WLAN
> > "We could put the whole Internet into a book."
> > "Too practical."
> > Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
> > Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
> >Ipv6hackers mailing list
> >Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com
> Ipv6hackers mailing list
> Ipv6hackers at lists.si6networks.com
More information about the Ipv6hackers