Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition

["philemon" <philemon at drtvnet.cg>]

Hi All



Just an input about the NAT issue handled here. The 'war' against NAT is 
senseless before succeeding the one against IPv4. I mean, as far as the v4 
protocol runs on our networks, NAT will remain as a useful tool for those 
who need it, of course for specific applications. In developing countries 
for example where IPv6 entry is very slow -add to a scarcity of IPv4 
addresses- we are always using NAT, and are happy to do so as:

1- No enough IPv4 addresses

2-No need for the specific applications for those networks

3-No alternative solution currently 'in the hands'.



Thanks



Philemon




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hannes Tschofenig" <Hannes.Tschofenig at gmx.net>
To: "Keith Moore" <moore at cs.utk.edu>
Cc: "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen at sprunk.org>; <ietf at ietf.org>; "Paul Hoffman" 
<paul.hoffman at vpnc.org>
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 9:11 PM
Subject: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition


> Hi Keith,
>
> Keith Moore wrote:
> > > Most application protocols work just fine behind NAT. FTP works with
> > > an ugly work-around. The main protocol that breaks down is SIP.
> >
> > there are a couple of problems with this analysis:
> >
> > one is that it considers only application protocols that are in
> > widespread use.  there are lots of applications that are used by limited
> > communities that are nevertheless important.
>
> Namely?
>
>
> >   and of course, since NATs
> > are so pervasive, most of the applications that are in widespread use
> > have been made to work with NAT (often at tremendous expense, and
> > reduced reliability).
> Could you explain the tremendous expense a bit more?
>
>
> > another problem is that it only considers current applications.  a big
> > part of the problem with NAT is that it inhibits the
> > development/deployment of useful new applications.
>
> As Phillip stated, I don't see the problem with future applications. 
> Compare this with the security aspects that are taken care of much more 
> than before when developing new applications NAT traversal is just another 
> thing to think about as a protocol designer.
>
> Ciao
> Hannes
>
> > Keith
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ietf mailing list
> > Ietf at ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf



_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf