[ipv6hackers] IPv6 security (slides and training)
trejrco at gmail.com
Fri Nov 18 01:58:57 CET 2011
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 19:28, Cameron Byrne <cb.list6 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 17, 2011 3:47 PM, "fred bovy" <fred at fredbovy.com> wrote:
> > >The question isn't, "Is IPv6 the right answer?" The question is, "Why
> > >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
> > Fred
> Many mobile providers provide mifi hotspots or hotspots on phones that are
> effectively Nat444.
> The mobile provider does Nat44 in their core and the android phone or mifi
> does nat44 providing addresses to the tethered clients / WLAN
Is this a good point in the conversation to make a request to the handset
OS manufacturers and telcos to please(!) support DHCPv6-PD on IPv6 capable
Are any doing that now?
(Specifically, I am speaking to Google/Android and VerizonWireless ... I
really want my LTE device, that I am paying for "wifi tethering" on, to
allow my laptop the same IPv6 connectivity the phone itself has ... )
More information about the Ipv6hackers